Implement LLM-driven governance architecture with structured memory
This commit completes the transition to a pure LLM-driven agentic governance system with no hard-coded governance logic. Core Architecture Changes: - Add structured memory system (memory.py) for tracking governance processes - Add LLM tools (tools.py) for deterministic operations (math, dates, random) - Add audit trail system (audit.py) for human-readable decision explanations - Add LLM-driven agent (agent_refactored.py) that interprets constitution Documentation: - Add ARCHITECTURE.md describing process-centric design - Add ARCHITECTURE_EXAMPLE.md with complete workflow walkthrough - Update README.md to reflect current LLM-driven architecture - Simplify constitution.md to benevolent dictator model for testing Templates: - Add 8 governance templates (petition, consensus, do-ocracy, jury, etc.) - Add 8 dispute resolution templates - All templates work with generic process-based architecture Key Design Principles: - "Process" is central abstraction (not "proposal") - No hard-coded process types or thresholds - LLM interprets constitution to understand governance rules - Tools ensure correctness for calculations - Complete auditability with reasoning and citations Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
Nathan Schneider
237
templates/README.md
Normal file
237
templates/README.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,237 @@
|
||||
# Governance Constitution Templates
|
||||
|
||||
This directory contains ready-to-use governance constitution templates based on [CommunityRule](https://communityrule.info/) patterns. Each template provides a complete governance framework that can be used with the governance bot.
|
||||
|
||||
## How to Use These Templates
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Choose a template** that matches your community's governance philosophy
|
||||
2. **Copy the template** to your project root or config directory as `constitution.md`
|
||||
3. **Customize it** to fit your specific community needs
|
||||
4. **Configure your bot** to use the constitution file
|
||||
5. **Iterate** - constitutions can be amended through their own processes
|
||||
|
||||
## Available Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Benevolent Dictator (`benevolent-dictator.md`)
|
||||
**"The Benevolent Dictator holds ultimate decision-making power, until the group is ready for a more inclusive structure."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- New communities establishing initial direction
|
||||
- Projects with a clear founder/leader
|
||||
- Situations requiring quick decisive action
|
||||
- Communities planning to transition to shared governance
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Single leader with final authority
|
||||
- Community input and discussion
|
||||
- Delegation of specific powers
|
||||
- Built-in transition mechanisms
|
||||
- Transparent decision-making
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Circles (`circles.md`)
|
||||
**"Units called Circles have the ability to decide and act on matters in their domains, which their members agree on through a Council."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Communities with distinct functional areas
|
||||
- Organizations needing domain expertise
|
||||
- Groups wanting distributed decision-making
|
||||
- Communities with specialized working groups
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Domain-based autonomous units
|
||||
- Representative council for coordination
|
||||
- Lazy consensus decision-making
|
||||
- Clear boundaries between domains
|
||||
- Scalable structure
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Consensus (`consensus.md`)
|
||||
**"Decisions that affect the group collectively should involve participation of all participants."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Communities valuing inclusive participation
|
||||
- Groups with strong solidarity culture
|
||||
- Situations where buy-in is crucial
|
||||
- Communities willing to invest time in deliberation
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Full member participation in decisions
|
||||
- Thorough deliberation processes
|
||||
- Block rights for fundamental concerns
|
||||
- Do-ocracy for personal initiatives
|
||||
- Focus on addressing all concerns
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Do-ocracy (`do-ocracy.md`)
|
||||
**"Those who take initiative to do something in the group can decide how they do it."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Action-oriented communities
|
||||
- Groups valuing individual initiative
|
||||
- Projects emphasizing experimentation
|
||||
- Communities wanting low bureaucracy
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Authority through contribution
|
||||
- Low barriers to action
|
||||
- Community lobbying for major changes
|
||||
- Accountability through reversibility
|
||||
- Trust-based culture
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Elected Board (`elected-board.md`)
|
||||
**"Policy-making body selected through voting processes."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Larger communities needing representation
|
||||
- Organizations requiring regular leadership
|
||||
- Groups with diverse stakeholder interests
|
||||
- Communities wanting democratic accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Regular elections
|
||||
- Representative decision-making
|
||||
- Member petition rights
|
||||
- Board accountability mechanisms
|
||||
- Clear delegation structure
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Jury (`jury.md`)
|
||||
**"Proposals are shaped and decided on by randomly selected juries."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Communities wanting fairness through randomness
|
||||
- Groups concerned about power concentration
|
||||
- Organizations valuing deliberation
|
||||
- Communities with engaged membership
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Random selection (sortition)
|
||||
- Rotating participation
|
||||
- Informed jury deliberation
|
||||
- Policy register and precedents
|
||||
- Legislature coordinates process
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Petition (`petition.md`)
|
||||
**"Community-wide proposal and voting mechanism."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Communities valuing direct democracy
|
||||
- Groups with active, engaged members
|
||||
- Organizations wanting simple governance
|
||||
- Communities comfortable with referendums
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Any member can petition
|
||||
- Direct community-wide voting
|
||||
- Simple majority for most decisions
|
||||
- Supermajority for constitutional changes
|
||||
- No representative layer
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Self-Appointed Board (`self-appointed-board.md`)
|
||||
**"Self-selecting leadership determines policies and implementation."**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Communities with clear mission/values
|
||||
- Projects requiring consistent vision
|
||||
- Organizations valuing expertise and experience
|
||||
- Groups comfortable with trustee model
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Board selects successors
|
||||
- Stability and continuity
|
||||
- Merit-based selection
|
||||
- Member feedback mechanisms
|
||||
- Transparent decision-making
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparison Table
|
||||
|
||||
| Template | Decision Speed | Participation | Complexity | Scalability |
|
||||
|----------|---------------|---------------|------------|-------------|
|
||||
| Benevolent Dictator | Very Fast | Low | Simple | Good |
|
||||
| Circles | Fast | Medium | Medium | Excellent |
|
||||
| Consensus | Slow | Very High | Medium | Limited |
|
||||
| Do-ocracy | Very Fast | High | Simple | Good |
|
||||
| Elected Board | Medium | Medium | Medium | Excellent |
|
||||
| Jury | Slow | Medium | High | Good |
|
||||
| Petition | Medium | Very High | Simple | Good |
|
||||
| Self-Appointed Board | Fast | Low | Simple | Good |
|
||||
|
||||
## Customization Tips
|
||||
|
||||
When adapting a template:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Adjust timeframes** - Discussion and voting periods to fit your community's pace
|
||||
2. **Modify thresholds** - Voting percentages and quorum requirements
|
||||
3. **Add your values** - Incorporate your code of conduct and community principles
|
||||
4. **Specify your context** - Platform-specific details (Mastodon, Discord, etc.)
|
||||
5. **Keep it readable** - The bot interprets natural language, so write clearly
|
||||
|
||||
## Combining Templates
|
||||
|
||||
You can mix elements from different templates:
|
||||
- Start with Benevolent Dictator, transition to Elected Board
|
||||
- Use Circles for some domains, Consensus for others
|
||||
- Combine Do-ocracy with Petition for different decision types
|
||||
- Layer Jury on top of Elected Board for major decisions
|
||||
|
||||
## Common Customizations
|
||||
|
||||
**Timeframes:**
|
||||
- Standard proposal: 5-7 days typical
|
||||
- Urgent: 2-3 days
|
||||
- Constitutional: 10-14 days
|
||||
|
||||
**Voting Thresholds:**
|
||||
- Simple majority: 50% + 1
|
||||
- Supermajority: 60-67%
|
||||
- Consensus: 90-100%
|
||||
|
||||
**Quorum Requirements:**
|
||||
- Low engagement: no quorum
|
||||
- Medium: 10-20% of members
|
||||
- High: 30-50% of members
|
||||
|
||||
## Dispute Resolution Templates
|
||||
|
||||
**NEW!** We've added comprehensive dispute resolution templates in the `dispute-resolution/` subdirectory.
|
||||
|
||||
Good governance requires not just decision-making processes, but also ways to handle conflicts. The dispute resolution templates can be integrated into any governance constitution as conflict resolution articles.
|
||||
|
||||
**8 Dispute Resolution Processes Available:**
|
||||
- **Peer-to-Peer** - Self-facilitated direct resolution
|
||||
- **Chosen Facilitator** - Mutually selected facilitator guides process
|
||||
- **Restorative Justice** - Circle process emphasizing healing
|
||||
- **Transformative Justice** - Addressing root causes and systemic change
|
||||
- **Community Jury** - Random selection for formal decisions
|
||||
- **Community Referee** - Single trained referee decides
|
||||
- **Facilitation Council** - Panel of facilitators manages process
|
||||
- **Shalish Mediation** - Traditional village mediation modernized
|
||||
|
||||
See `dispute-resolution/README.md` for detailed comparison and guidance on choosing the right process for your community.
|
||||
|
||||
**Integration Options:**
|
||||
1. Add one dispute resolution article to your constitution
|
||||
2. Create multiple pathways for different severity levels
|
||||
3. Build an escalation ladder from simple to complex processes
|
||||
|
||||
## Testing Your Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
Before deployment:
|
||||
1. Review with your founding members
|
||||
2. Simulate common scenarios
|
||||
3. Test with the bot using CLI mode
|
||||
4. Run a trial period with amendments allowed
|
||||
5. Document learnings and adjust
|
||||
|
||||
## Contributing
|
||||
|
||||
Found an issue with a template? Have a suggestion? Open an issue or PR at the main repository.
|
||||
|
||||
## Credits
|
||||
|
||||
**Governance Templates** are inspired by [CommunityRule](https://communityrule.info/), a project by the Media Enterprise Design Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder.
|
||||
|
||||
**Dispute Resolution Templates** are adapted from the [Dispute Protocol Builder](https://git.medlab.host/dispute-protocol/builder-prototype), also by the Media Enterprise Design Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder.
|
||||
|
||||
All templates have been adapted for use with agentic governance bots and formatted in natural language for AI interpretation.
|
||||
|
||||
## License
|
||||
|
||||
[To be determined - match project license]
|
||||
158
templates/benevolent-dictator.md
Normal file
158
templates/benevolent-dictator.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,158 @@
|
||||
# Benevolent Dictator Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes a governance structure where a single leader maintains ultimate decision-making authority while the community develops toward more collaborative governance.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Leadership Authority
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: The Benevolent Dictator
|
||||
The Benevolent Dictator (BD) holds final authority over all community decisions, including:
|
||||
- Policy changes and community rules
|
||||
- Administrative actions and moderation
|
||||
- Resource allocation
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Delegation of specific powers
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Leadership Principles
|
||||
The BD should exercise authority with these principles:
|
||||
- Act in the best interests of the community
|
||||
- Listen to community input and concerns
|
||||
- Explain decisions when requested
|
||||
- Delegate authority to build capacity
|
||||
- Work toward eventual power-sharing
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Succession Planning
|
||||
The BD may designate a successor at any time. If the BD becomes unable to serve without designating a successor, the most senior delegated authority assumes leadership temporarily while the community determines next steps.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Community Input and Lobbying
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Member Rights
|
||||
All community members have the right to:
|
||||
- Propose ideas and changes to the BD
|
||||
- Express opinions on governance matters
|
||||
- Request explanation of decisions
|
||||
- Participate in discussions
|
||||
- Lobby for specific outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Input Process
|
||||
Members can provide input by:
|
||||
1. Mentioning @govbot with proposals or concerns
|
||||
2. The bot forwards all input to the BD
|
||||
3. The bot may facilitate discussion if requested
|
||||
4. The BD makes the final decision
|
||||
5. Decisions are announced with rationale
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Community Discussion
|
||||
The BD may call for community discussion on any matter:
|
||||
- Discussion period set by BD (typically 3-7 days)
|
||||
- All members may participate
|
||||
- Bot facilitates and summarizes discussion
|
||||
- BD considers input before deciding
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Delegated Authority
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Delegation
|
||||
The BD may delegate specific authorities to trusted members:
|
||||
- Moderation powers for specific situations
|
||||
- Administrative authority for defined areas
|
||||
- Decision-making for particular domains
|
||||
- Leadership of working groups or projects
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Delegated Powers
|
||||
Delegated authorities can make decisions within their scope:
|
||||
- Bot tracks delegated authorities and scopes
|
||||
- Delegated decisions should align with community values
|
||||
- BD can override any delegated decision
|
||||
- Delegation can be revoked by BD at any time
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Advisory Councils
|
||||
The BD may establish advisory councils:
|
||||
- Councils provide expertise and recommendations
|
||||
- BD consults councils before major decisions
|
||||
- Council input is advisory, not binding
|
||||
- Bot helps coordinate council discussions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Governance Evolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Transition Planning
|
||||
This constitution includes provisions for evolving toward shared governance:
|
||||
- BD may gradually delegate more decision-making power
|
||||
- The community can experiment with collaborative processes
|
||||
- BD retains final authority during transition
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments can formalize new structures
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Expiration Clause
|
||||
This constitution can include an expiration date or milestone after which the community adopts a more participatory governance model. The BD sets the expiration terms.
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
The BD may amend this constitution at any time, preferably with community input.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Moderation
|
||||
The BD has full moderation authority:
|
||||
- Can take immediate action on rule violations
|
||||
- May delegate moderation powers to trusted members
|
||||
- Bot can execute moderation when authorized
|
||||
- Moderation decisions are final unless BD reverses
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Member Management
|
||||
The BD manages membership:
|
||||
- Approve/deny new member applications
|
||||
- Suspend or remove problematic members
|
||||
- Set membership criteria and standards
|
||||
- Delegate membership decisions as appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Platform Configuration
|
||||
The BD controls all platform settings:
|
||||
- Server configuration and technical settings
|
||||
- Federation policies
|
||||
- Feature enablement
|
||||
- Bot configuration and authority
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Appeals and Review
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Appeal Process
|
||||
Members may appeal decisions to the BD:
|
||||
1. Submit appeal with reasoning to @govbot
|
||||
2. BD reviews appeal and context
|
||||
3. BD may request more information or discussion
|
||||
4. BD makes final decision on appeal
|
||||
5. Decision is announced with explanation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
The BD interprets this constitution:
|
||||
- Bot may request clarification when uncertain
|
||||
- BD provides authoritative interpretation
|
||||
- Interpretations guide future similar cases
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Emergency Override
|
||||
In case of bot malfunction:
|
||||
- BD has ultimate technical and policy control
|
||||
- Can immediately halt or reverse any bot action
|
||||
- Can reconfigure or disable bot as needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Transparency and Records
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Decision Records
|
||||
Bot maintains records of:
|
||||
- All proposals and community input
|
||||
- BD decisions and stated rationale
|
||||
- Delegated authorities and their scope
|
||||
- Appeals and their outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Access to Information
|
||||
All members can access governance records to understand decision-making history and precedent.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates a benevolent dictatorship with transparency and community engagement:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Efficiency**: Single decision-maker enables quick responses
|
||||
2. **Stability**: Clear authority prevents governance paralysis
|
||||
3. **Growth Path**: Structure supports evolution toward collaboration
|
||||
4. **Transparency**: All decisions documented and explained
|
||||
5. **Community Voice**: Input welcomed even if not binding
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should facilitate communication between the BD and community while respecting the BD's final authority.
|
||||
221
templates/circles.md
Normal file
221
templates/circles.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,221 @@
|
||||
# Circles Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes domain-based governance through autonomous circles that coordinate via a representative council.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Circle Structure
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: What are Circles?
|
||||
Circles are self-governing units with authority over specific domains:
|
||||
- Each circle manages a defined area (e.g., Moderation, Events, Technology, Outreach)
|
||||
- Circles make decisions within their domain autonomously
|
||||
- Circles coordinate through the Council for cross-domain matters
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Circle Formation
|
||||
New circles can be created through Council proposal:
|
||||
- Any member can propose a new circle
|
||||
- Proposal must define the circle's domain and purpose
|
||||
- Council approves via lazy consensus (Article 4)
|
||||
- Bot tracks active circles and their domains
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Circle Membership
|
||||
Each circle determines its own membership:
|
||||
- Circles set their own joining criteria
|
||||
- Members can participate in multiple circles
|
||||
- Circles can remove members via internal process
|
||||
- Bot maintains membership rosters for each circle
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Circle Authority
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Domain Decisions
|
||||
Within their domain, circles have full authority to:
|
||||
- Set policies and procedures
|
||||
- Make operational decisions
|
||||
- Allocate resources within their budget
|
||||
- Execute actions through the bot
|
||||
- Establish internal processes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Cross-Domain Coordination
|
||||
For decisions affecting multiple circles:
|
||||
- Circle brings proposal to Council
|
||||
- Council facilitates discussion across circles
|
||||
- Resolution via Council consensus process
|
||||
- Bot tracks cross-domain proposals
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Constitutional Bounds
|
||||
Circle decisions must align with:
|
||||
- This constitution's core principles
|
||||
- Decisions made by the Council
|
||||
- Community-wide policies
|
||||
- Legal and ethical requirements
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: The Council
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Council Composition
|
||||
The Council consists of representatives from each active circle:
|
||||
- Each circle selects one representative (method determined by circle)
|
||||
- Representatives serve rotating terms (default: 3 months)
|
||||
- Representatives can be recalled by their circle
|
||||
- Bot tracks current Council composition
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Council Authority
|
||||
The Council governs matters that:
|
||||
- Affect multiple circles or the whole community
|
||||
- Define new circles or change circle domains
|
||||
- Amend this constitution
|
||||
- Resolve disputes between circles
|
||||
- Set community-wide policies
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Council Decisions
|
||||
Council uses lazy consensus (see Article 4):
|
||||
- Any representative can bring proposals
|
||||
- Discussion period set by proposal type
|
||||
- Passes unless objections are raised
|
||||
- Bot facilitates Council deliberations
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Decision-Making Process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Lazy Consensus
|
||||
Proposals pass via lazy consensus:
|
||||
- Proposal posted with discussion period (default: 5 days)
|
||||
- Passes automatically unless objections raised
|
||||
- If objections, discussion continues to find resolution
|
||||
- Objectors must suggest alternatives or modifications
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Within Circles
|
||||
Each circle determines its internal decision process:
|
||||
- Can use lazy consensus, voting, or other methods
|
||||
- Process should be documented and consistent
|
||||
- Must allow all circle members to participate
|
||||
- Bot adapts to each circle's chosen method
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: In Council
|
||||
Council decisions require:
|
||||
- Standard proposals: 5 days, lazy consensus
|
||||
- Urgent proposals: 2 days, lazy consensus
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments: 10 days, must have active support from at least half of circle representatives
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.4: Objection Resolution
|
||||
When objections are raised:
|
||||
1. Objector explains concerns
|
||||
2. Proposer may modify proposal
|
||||
3. Circle/Council discusses alternatives
|
||||
4. Continue until consensus reached or proposal withdrawn
|
||||
5. If stuck, escalate to constitutional interpretation
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Delegation and Coordination
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Circle Delegation
|
||||
Circles can delegate specific tasks:
|
||||
- To individual members within the circle
|
||||
- To working groups for projects
|
||||
- To other circles for specialized work
|
||||
- Bot tracks delegations and authorities
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Inter-Circle Collaboration
|
||||
Circles can work together without Council approval:
|
||||
- Joint working groups
|
||||
- Shared projects
|
||||
- Resource sharing
|
||||
- Mutual support
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Information Sharing
|
||||
All circles should:
|
||||
- Post meeting summaries
|
||||
- Share significant decisions
|
||||
- Update the community regularly
|
||||
- Maintain transparency
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Membership and Participation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Community Membership
|
||||
Community members who aren't in any circle:
|
||||
- Can observe circle discussions
|
||||
- Can propose new circles
|
||||
- Can apply to join circles
|
||||
- Can bring concerns to Council
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Circle Joining
|
||||
To join a circle:
|
||||
1. Express interest to circle members
|
||||
2. Circle evaluates based on their criteria
|
||||
3. Circle decides via their internal process
|
||||
4. Bot updates membership records
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Participation Expectations
|
||||
Circle members should:
|
||||
- Actively participate in their circle
|
||||
- Attend meetings when possible
|
||||
- Engage with circle decisions
|
||||
- Represent circle values
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Domain-Specific Actions
|
||||
Circles execute actions within their domain:
|
||||
- Moderation circle handles moderation
|
||||
- Tech circle manages platform configuration
|
||||
- Events circle organizes gatherings
|
||||
- Bot performs actions as authorized by relevant circle
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Cross-Domain Actions
|
||||
Actions affecting multiple domains:
|
||||
- Require Council approval
|
||||
- Must consider impact on all circles
|
||||
- Implemented with input from affected circles
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Emergency Actions
|
||||
For urgent safety/security matters:
|
||||
- Relevant circle can act immediately
|
||||
- Must report to Council within 24 hours
|
||||
- Council can review and reverse if needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Disputes and Appeals
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: Within Circles
|
||||
Circle-internal disputes:
|
||||
- Resolved within circle via their process
|
||||
- Circle members try to find consensus
|
||||
- Can request Council mediation if stuck
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Between Circles
|
||||
Inter-circle disputes:
|
||||
- Brought to Council for mediation
|
||||
- Council facilitates discussion
|
||||
- Seeks solution respecting both domains
|
||||
- May redefine domain boundaries if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
Council interprets this constitution:
|
||||
- Any circle or member can request interpretation
|
||||
- Council discusses and provides guidance
|
||||
- Interpretations guide future similar cases
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Amendment Process
|
||||
To amend this constitution:
|
||||
1. Any circle representative proposes amendment
|
||||
2. Council discusses (10 days minimum)
|
||||
3. Requires active support from at least half of circle representatives
|
||||
4. Bot updates constitution when approved
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Circle Domain Changes
|
||||
To modify circle domains:
|
||||
1. Affected circles discuss proposed changes
|
||||
2. Bring proposal to Council
|
||||
3. Council approves via lazy consensus
|
||||
4. Bot updates circle definitions
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates distributed governance through circles:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Autonomy**: Circles self-govern within their domains
|
||||
2. **Coordination**: Council handles cross-domain issues
|
||||
3. **Scalability**: New circles can form as community grows
|
||||
4. **Efficiency**: Decisions made at appropriate level
|
||||
5. **Flexibility**: Each circle chooses its internal processes
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should track circle boundaries, facilitate Council coordination, and execute authorized actions while respecting circle autonomy.
|
||||
259
templates/consensus.md
Normal file
259
templates/consensus.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,259 @@
|
||||
# Consensus Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes participatory governance where collective decisions require inclusive deliberation and broad agreement.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Governance Principles
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: Consensus Decision-Making
|
||||
Decisions affecting the collective require:
|
||||
- Inclusive participation of all members
|
||||
- Thorough deliberation and discussion
|
||||
- Active effort to address all concerns
|
||||
- Decisions that everyone can live with
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Good Faith Participation
|
||||
Members engage in consensus with:
|
||||
- Willingness to listen and adapt
|
||||
- Respect for diverse perspectives
|
||||
- Focus on community wellbeing
|
||||
- Commitment to finding common ground
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Balance of Action and Participation
|
||||
While consensus is the goal:
|
||||
- Individual initiative (do-ocracy) is encouraged for non-collective matters
|
||||
- Consensus required for decisions affecting shared resources or community direction
|
||||
- Clear distinction between personal actions and collective decisions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Member Rights
|
||||
All members have equal rights to:
|
||||
- Participate in all consensus processes
|
||||
- Propose decisions for community consideration
|
||||
- Voice concerns and objections
|
||||
- Access all governance discussions and records
|
||||
- Request slower pace or more information
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Membership Criteria
|
||||
The community determines membership through consensus:
|
||||
- Application process defined collectively
|
||||
- Existing members evaluate new applicants
|
||||
- Membership decisions via consensus
|
||||
- Trial periods may be used
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Member Responsibilities
|
||||
Members commit to:
|
||||
- Participate in governance when able
|
||||
- Consider community impact of their actions
|
||||
- Engage constructively in deliberation
|
||||
- Honor consensus decisions
|
||||
- Support fellow members
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Consensus Process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Proposal Creation
|
||||
Any member may bring a proposal:
|
||||
1. Post proposal mentioning @govbot
|
||||
2. Include clear description and rationale
|
||||
3. Specify what decision is needed
|
||||
4. Bot opens deliberation period
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Deliberation Period
|
||||
Proposals enter deliberation:
|
||||
- Standard proposals: 7 days minimum
|
||||
- Urgent proposals: 3 days minimum (with justification)
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments: 14 days minimum
|
||||
- Extensions granted if members request more time
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Discussion and Refinement
|
||||
During deliberation:
|
||||
- All members can comment and ask questions
|
||||
- Concerns are raised and discussed
|
||||
- Proposer may modify proposal based on feedback
|
||||
- Goal is to address all significant concerns
|
||||
- Bot tracks discussion and proposal versions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.4: Reaching Consensus
|
||||
Consensus is reached when:
|
||||
- No member states they "block" the proposal
|
||||
- All raised concerns have been addressed or withdrawn
|
||||
- Members express support or "stand aside"
|
||||
- Bot confirms consensus and records decision
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Response Types
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Support
|
||||
"I support this proposal" or "Agree"
|
||||
- Member actively backs the proposal
|
||||
- Willing to help implement if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Stand Aside
|
||||
"I stand aside" or "Abstain"
|
||||
- Member has reservations but won't block
|
||||
- Allows decision to proceed without their support
|
||||
- May not wish to participate in implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Concerns
|
||||
"I have concerns about..."
|
||||
- Member raises issues needing discussion
|
||||
- Doesn't block but seeks resolution
|
||||
- Proposer and community address concerns
|
||||
- May result in proposal modification
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.4: Block
|
||||
"I block this proposal because..."
|
||||
- Fundamental objection preventing consensus
|
||||
- Must include explanation and reasoning
|
||||
- Triggers deeper discussion
|
||||
- Requires addressing the core concern
|
||||
- Cannot be used lightly or without justification
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Addressing Blocks
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Block Discussion
|
||||
When a block is raised:
|
||||
1. Blocker explains fundamental concern
|
||||
2. Community discusses underlying issues
|
||||
3. Proposer may modify proposal
|
||||
4. Alternative solutions explored
|
||||
5. Continue until consensus or proposal withdrawn
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Legitimate Blocks
|
||||
Blocks are appropriate when:
|
||||
- Proposal violates core community values
|
||||
- Serious ethical concerns exist
|
||||
- Proposal would harm members or community
|
||||
- Constitutional principles at stake
|
||||
- Major unaddressed risks
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Working Through Blocks
|
||||
To resolve blocks:
|
||||
- Listen deeply to blocker's concerns
|
||||
- Understand the underlying values at stake
|
||||
- Propose modifications addressing root issues
|
||||
- Consider alternative approaches
|
||||
- May need to pause and return later
|
||||
- Sometimes proposals should be withdrawn
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Do-ocracy
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Personal Initiative
|
||||
Members can act independently when:
|
||||
- Action doesn't affect shared resources
|
||||
- Decision doesn't impact other members
|
||||
- Falls within member's personal domain
|
||||
- Doesn't contradict collective decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Responsibility with Initiative
|
||||
Those who take initiative:
|
||||
- Are responsible for their actions
|
||||
- Should communicate what they're doing
|
||||
- Must respect others' autonomy
|
||||
- Can be asked to change course by consensus
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: When Consensus Required
|
||||
Consensus is required for:
|
||||
- Changes to shared resources or spaces
|
||||
- Policy affecting multiple members
|
||||
- Spending community funds
|
||||
- Actions using community name/identity
|
||||
- Decisions binding on others
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Exclusion and Boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Community Boundaries
|
||||
The community can make exclusion decisions via consensus:
|
||||
- Removing members who violate core values
|
||||
- Blocking disruptive participants
|
||||
- Defederating from harmful instances
|
||||
- Setting participation requirements
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Exclusion Process
|
||||
For exclusion decisions:
|
||||
1. Concerns raised about member's behavior
|
||||
2. Community discusses issue (minimum 5 days)
|
||||
3. Member in question can respond and participate
|
||||
4. Community seeks consensus on appropriate response
|
||||
5. Ranges from warning to removal
|
||||
6. Bot implements decision if consensus reached
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Due Process
|
||||
Members facing exclusion:
|
||||
- Must be notified of concerns
|
||||
- Have right to respond and participate
|
||||
- Can appeal to constitutional principles
|
||||
- Exclusion only via clear consensus
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: Routine Administration
|
||||
Routine actions can proceed without consensus:
|
||||
- Server maintenance and updates
|
||||
- Implementing already-decided policies
|
||||
- Emergency security responses
|
||||
- Technical operations
|
||||
- Must be reported to community
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Policy Actions
|
||||
Policy changes require consensus:
|
||||
- Moderation policy
|
||||
- Code of conduct
|
||||
- Community guidelines
|
||||
- Federation policies
|
||||
- Bot authority and capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Emergency Actions
|
||||
For urgent safety matters:
|
||||
- Any member can take protective action
|
||||
- Must explain action to community immediately
|
||||
- Community reviews via expedited consensus
|
||||
- Action may be reversed if consensus determines
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Interpretation Process
|
||||
When constitutional meaning is unclear:
|
||||
1. Member requests interpretation from @govbot
|
||||
2. Bot provides initial interpretation with reasoning
|
||||
3. Community discusses interpretation
|
||||
4. Consensus on correct interpretation
|
||||
5. May lead to constitutional amendment for clarity
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Precedent
|
||||
Bot maintains record of:
|
||||
- Consensus decisions and their reasoning
|
||||
- Constitutional interpretations
|
||||
- How past issues were resolved
|
||||
- Guides future similar situations
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 10: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.1: Amendment Process
|
||||
To amend this constitution:
|
||||
1. Member proposes specific amendment
|
||||
2. Extended deliberation (14 days minimum)
|
||||
3. Thorough discussion of implications
|
||||
4. Must reach clear consensus
|
||||
5. Bot updates constitution when consensus achieved
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.2: Core Principles
|
||||
Amendments should preserve:
|
||||
- Participatory decision-making
|
||||
- Inclusive deliberation
|
||||
- Good faith engagement
|
||||
- Protection of member rights
|
||||
- Consensus process
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates participatory governance through consensus:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Inclusion**: All members participate in collective decisions
|
||||
2. **Deliberation**: Thorough discussion before decisions
|
||||
3. **Flexibility**: Do-ocracy for individual initiative
|
||||
4. **Safety**: Exclusion processes protect community
|
||||
5. **Adaptation**: Consensus evolves with community needs
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should facilitate inclusive discussion, track deliberations, help clarify concerns, and confirm when consensus is reached. The bot should err on the side of more discussion rather than prematurely declaring consensus.
|
||||
343
templates/dispute-resolution/README.md
Normal file
343
templates/dispute-resolution/README.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,343 @@
|
||||
# Dispute Resolution Templates
|
||||
|
||||
This directory contains comprehensive dispute resolution protocols that can be integrated into governance constitutions. Each template provides a complete framework for handling conflicts and disputes in online and offline communities.
|
||||
|
||||
## Overview
|
||||
|
||||
Effective governance requires not just decision-making processes, but also ways to handle conflicts when they arise. These templates are based on proven dispute resolution models from the [Community Rule Builder project](https://git.medlab.host/dispute-protocol/builder-prototype) and adapted for use with agentic governance bots.
|
||||
|
||||
## How to Use These Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### Option 1: Standalone Integration
|
||||
Add a dispute resolution article to your existing constitution:
|
||||
1. Choose a dispute resolution template
|
||||
2. Copy it into your constitution as a new article (e.g., "Article 7: Dispute Resolution")
|
||||
3. Adjust details to fit your community context
|
||||
4. Configure your bot to recognize and facilitate the process
|
||||
|
||||
### Option 2: Multiple Pathways
|
||||
Implement several processes for different situations:
|
||||
- Peer-to-peer for minor conflicts
|
||||
- Mediation or circles for deeper issues
|
||||
- Jury or referee for formal decisions
|
||||
- Different intensities for different needs
|
||||
|
||||
### Option 3: Escalation Ladder
|
||||
Create a progression of dispute resolution:
|
||||
1. Start with peer-to-peer
|
||||
2. Escalate to chosen facilitator if needed
|
||||
3. Move to circles or mediation for deeper work
|
||||
4. Use jury/referee for binding decisions
|
||||
5. Each level more structured and formal
|
||||
|
||||
## Available Templates
|
||||
|
||||
### 1. Peer-to-Peer (`peer-to-peer.md`)
|
||||
**"A self-facilitated process where participants work together directly to resolve disputes"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Minor interpersonal conflicts
|
||||
- Misunderstandings needing clarification
|
||||
- Communities valuing member autonomy
|
||||
- First step in escalation ladder
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- No third-party facilitator
|
||||
- Self-managed by parties
|
||||
- Voluntary participation
|
||||
- Simple ground rules
|
||||
- Quick resolution
|
||||
- Escalation path available
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** Low | **Time:** Hours to days | **Formality:** Minimal
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 2. Chosen Facilitator (`chosen-facilitator.md`)
|
||||
**"Participants mutually select a facilitator to help guide their dispute resolution"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Conflicts needing structured support
|
||||
- Situations where trust in process is crucial
|
||||
- Cases requiring neutral guidance
|
||||
- Communities with trained facilitators
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Parties jointly select facilitator
|
||||
- Structured process with ground rules
|
||||
- Facilitator guides but doesn't decide
|
||||
- 1-3 sessions typically
|
||||
- Support persons allowed
|
||||
- Clear appeal process
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** Medium | **Time:** 1-3 weeks | **Formality:** Medium
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 3. Restorative Justice (`restorative-justice.md`)
|
||||
**"A collaborative process emphasizing healing relationships and addressing harm through community engagement"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Harm between community members
|
||||
- Trust breakdowns requiring repair
|
||||
- Situations needing community support
|
||||
- Focus on healing over punishment
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Circle process with talking piece
|
||||
- Trained circle keeper
|
||||
- Community participation
|
||||
- Consensus-based agreements
|
||||
- Accountability through repair
|
||||
- Focus on transformation
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** Medium-High | **Time:** Weeks to months | **Formality:** Medium
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 4. Transformative Justice (`transformative-justice.md`)
|
||||
**"A process addressing immediate harm while transforming conditions that enabled it"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Complex harm requiring deep work
|
||||
- Addressing systemic issues
|
||||
- Pattern behavior needing transformation
|
||||
- Alternatives to state intervention
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Multi-level analysis (individual to systemic)
|
||||
- Support teams for all parties
|
||||
- Long-term commitment
|
||||
- Root cause focus
|
||||
- Community education
|
||||
- Liberation-oriented
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** High | **Time:** Months to years | **Formality:** Structured but flexible
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 5. Community Jury (`community-jury.md`)
|
||||
**"Randomly selected community members evaluate evidence and resolve disputes through structured deliberation"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Formal dispute decisions
|
||||
- Policy interpretation
|
||||
- Agreement violations
|
||||
- Cases needing peer judgment
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Random selection (sortition)
|
||||
- 5-7 member juries
|
||||
- Structured evidence presentation
|
||||
- Deliberation and voting
|
||||
- Written decisions
|
||||
- Creates precedent
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** High | **Time:** 2-3 weeks | **Formality:** High
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 6. Community Referee (`community-referee.md`)
|
||||
**"A single trained referee facilitates and decides on dispute resolution"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Quick resolution needed
|
||||
- Routine disputes
|
||||
- Clear standards application
|
||||
- Efficient use of resources
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Single trained referee
|
||||
- Streamlined process
|
||||
- Expert decision-making
|
||||
- Written determination
|
||||
- Appeal to panel available
|
||||
- Consistent application
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** Medium | **Time:** 1-2 weeks | **Formality:** High
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 7. Facilitation Council (`facilitation-council.md`)
|
||||
**"A trained council of facilitators manages the dispute resolution process"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Complex cases needing multiple perspectives
|
||||
- Balance of thoroughness and structure
|
||||
- Communities with trained facilitators
|
||||
- Cases affecting broader community
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Panel of 2-3 facilitators
|
||||
- Multi-session deliberation
|
||||
- Tiered resolution approach
|
||||
- Consensus prioritized
|
||||
- Binding decisions when needed
|
||||
- Comprehensive documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** High | **Time:** 2-4 weeks | **Formality:** High
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
### 8. Shalish Mediation (`shalish-mediation.md`)
|
||||
**"Modernized traditional village-level mediation with cultural sensitivity"**
|
||||
|
||||
**Best for:**
|
||||
- Communities with cultural traditions
|
||||
- Harmony-focused resolution
|
||||
- Relationship preservation
|
||||
- Voluntary consensus-building
|
||||
|
||||
**Key features:**
|
||||
- Traditional roots, modern adaptations
|
||||
- Trained mediators
|
||||
- Voluntary participation
|
||||
- Cultural respect
|
||||
- Community harmony focus
|
||||
- No imposed solutions
|
||||
|
||||
**Complexity:** Medium | **Time:** Days to weeks | **Formality:** Low-Medium
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparison Matrix
|
||||
|
||||
| Template | Decision Authority | Speed | Formality | Community Involvement | Best For |
|
||||
|----------|-------------------|-------|-----------|----------------------|----------|
|
||||
| Peer-to-Peer | Parties | Fast | Low | Minimal | Minor conflicts |
|
||||
| Chosen Facilitator | Parties | Medium | Medium | Low | Structured dialogue |
|
||||
| Restorative Justice | Consensus | Slow | Medium | High | Healing harm |
|
||||
| Transformative Justice | Parties + Community | Very Slow | Medium | Very High | Deep transformation |
|
||||
| Community Jury | Jury | Medium | High | Medium | Formal decisions |
|
||||
| Community Referee | Referee | Fast | High | Low | Efficient resolution |
|
||||
| Facilitation Council | Council/Parties | Medium | High | Medium | Complex balanced cases |
|
||||
| Shalish Mediation | Parties | Medium | Low-Medium | Medium | Cultural harmony |
|
||||
|
||||
## Choosing the Right Process
|
||||
|
||||
### Consider These Factors:
|
||||
|
||||
**Conflict Severity:**
|
||||
- Minor → Peer-to-Peer
|
||||
- Moderate → Chosen Facilitator, Referee
|
||||
- Serious → Restorative Justice, Facilitation Council, Jury
|
||||
- Systemic → Transformative Justice
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Needs:**
|
||||
- Parties decide → Peer-to-Peer, Chosen Facilitator, Shalish
|
||||
- Binding decision needed → Referee, Jury, Council
|
||||
- Consensus focus → Restorative Justice, Transformative Justice
|
||||
|
||||
**Time Available:**
|
||||
- Quick (days) → Peer-to-Peer, Referee
|
||||
- Moderate (weeks) → Most processes
|
||||
- Extended (months) → Transformative Justice
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Resources:**
|
||||
- Limited → Peer-to-Peer, Referee
|
||||
- Moderate → Chosen Facilitator, Shalish
|
||||
- Substantial → Circles, Jury, Council, Transformative Justice
|
||||
|
||||
**Cultural Context:**
|
||||
- Western/modern → Most processes
|
||||
- Traditional/cultural → Shalish, Circles
|
||||
- Liberation-focused → Transformative Justice
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Recommendations
|
||||
|
||||
### Starting Out
|
||||
If your community is new to formal dispute resolution:
|
||||
1. Start with **Peer-to-Peer** for simple conflicts
|
||||
2. Add **Chosen Facilitator** when trained facilitators available
|
||||
3. Build toward more complex processes as capacity grows
|
||||
|
||||
### Comprehensive System
|
||||
For mature communities, implement multiple pathways:
|
||||
- **Peer-to-Peer** → First attempt
|
||||
- **Chosen Facilitator or Shalish** → If peer-to-peer doesn't work
|
||||
- **Restorative Circles** → For harm needing community involvement
|
||||
- **Referee or Jury** → For formal binding decisions
|
||||
- **Transformative Justice** → For systemic issues
|
||||
|
||||
### Essential Elements
|
||||
Regardless of process chosen, include:
|
||||
- Clear initiation procedures
|
||||
- Ground rules for respectful engagement
|
||||
- Voluntary participation (with consequences for refusal)
|
||||
- Confidentiality protections
|
||||
- Implementation and follow-up mechanisms
|
||||
- Appeals or reconsideration pathways
|
||||
- Learning and improvement systems
|
||||
|
||||
## Customization Tips
|
||||
|
||||
When adapting templates:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Adjust to your scale** - Processes designed for 50-500 member communities may need modification for very small or very large groups
|
||||
|
||||
2. **Cultural adaptation** - Incorporate your community's values, traditions, and communication styles
|
||||
|
||||
3. **Resource reality** - Scale processes to available trained facilitators, time, and support
|
||||
|
||||
4. **Integration** - Ensure dispute resolution integrates smoothly with your governance constitution
|
||||
|
||||
5. **Bot capabilities** - Configure what the bot can automate (scheduling, reminders, documentation) vs. what requires human facilitation
|
||||
|
||||
6. **Language** - Keep natural language clear for bot interpretation while being specific enough for consistent application
|
||||
|
||||
## Training and Capacity Building
|
||||
|
||||
Most processes require trained facilitators:
|
||||
- **Basic:** Peer-to-peer (minimal training)
|
||||
- **Intermediate:** Chosen Facilitator, Shalish, Referee
|
||||
- **Advanced:** Restorative Circles, Jury facilitation, Council, Transformative Justice
|
||||
|
||||
Consider:
|
||||
- How will facilitators be trained?
|
||||
- Who provides training?
|
||||
- How are facilitators selected?
|
||||
- Ongoing support and development?
|
||||
- Community investment in capacity building
|
||||
|
||||
## Combining with Governance Templates
|
||||
|
||||
These dispute resolution templates work with any governance constitution:
|
||||
|
||||
- **Benevolent Dictator** → Add Peer-to-Peer and Referee for member conflicts
|
||||
- **Do-ocracy** → Add Chosen Facilitator for when initiative creates conflict
|
||||
- **Consensus** → Add Restorative or Transformative Justice (values alignment)
|
||||
- **Circles** → Add Facilitation Council (similar structure)
|
||||
- **Elected Board** → Add Referee or Jury (formal decisions)
|
||||
- **Jury (governance)** → Add Community Jury for disputes too
|
||||
- **Petition** → Add any process, chosen by petition
|
||||
|
||||
## Bot Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
When configuring your governance bot:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Trigger recognition** - Bot should recognize dispute resolution requests
|
||||
2. **Process routing** - Direct to appropriate process based on situation
|
||||
3. **Logistics support** - Scheduling, notifications, reminders
|
||||
4. **Documentation** - Record keeping and confidentiality
|
||||
5. **Tracking** - Monitor implementation and compliance
|
||||
6. **Learning** - Collect anonymized data for improvement
|
||||
7. **Escalation** - Enable movement between processes
|
||||
|
||||
## Credits
|
||||
|
||||
These templates are adapted from the [Dispute Protocol Builder](https://git.medlab.host/dispute-protocol/builder-prototype) project by the Media Enterprise Design Lab at the University of Colorado Boulder, with modifications for agentic governance bot integration.
|
||||
|
||||
## Further Resources
|
||||
|
||||
- **CommunityRule** - https://communityrule.info/ - Governance templates
|
||||
- **Dispute Protocol Builder** - https://git.medlab.host/dispute-protocol/builder-prototype
|
||||
- **Restorative Justice** - Various community resources on restorative circles
|
||||
- **Transformative Justice** - Resources from community accountability movements
|
||||
|
||||
## Contributing
|
||||
|
||||
Found issues or have improvements? Contributions welcome to help these templates serve more communities effectively.
|
||||
|
||||
## License
|
||||
|
||||
[To be determined - match project license]
|
||||
289
templates/dispute-resolution/chosen-facilitator.md
Normal file
289
templates/dispute-resolution/chosen-facilitator.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,289 @@
|
||||
# Chosen Facilitator Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A process where participants mutually select a facilitator to help guide their dispute resolution*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community emphasizes:
|
||||
- Open dialogue and mutual respect
|
||||
- Collaborative problem-solving
|
||||
- Neutral facilitation chosen by parties
|
||||
- Participant empowerment
|
||||
- Confidential process
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Standards**
|
||||
- Guidelines available on community website
|
||||
- Physical materials at community center
|
||||
- Regular updates and review
|
||||
- Bot maintains current documentation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: Community Relations Committee
|
||||
|
||||
**Committee Structure**
|
||||
The Community Relations Committee:
|
||||
- Receives dispute forms
|
||||
- Coordinates facilitation process
|
||||
- Maintains facilitator pool
|
||||
- Tracks outcomes and patterns
|
||||
- Reports to governance body
|
||||
|
||||
**Committee Responsibilities**
|
||||
- Acknowledge dispute forms within 24 hours
|
||||
- Contact all parties within 48 hours
|
||||
- Provide copies and process information
|
||||
- Support facilitator selection
|
||||
- Monitor case progress
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: Initiating the Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Submitting a Dispute**
|
||||
Members submit dispute forms including:
|
||||
- Parties involved
|
||||
- Nature of the dispute
|
||||
- What has been tried so far
|
||||
- Desired outcomes
|
||||
- Submit via @govbot or physical form
|
||||
|
||||
**Committee Response**
|
||||
Within 48 hours, committee provides:
|
||||
- Acknowledgment of receipt
|
||||
- Process overview
|
||||
- Copy to all parties
|
||||
- Facilitator selection information
|
||||
- Timeline expectations
|
||||
|
||||
**Voluntary But Encouraged**
|
||||
- Participation is voluntary
|
||||
- Community members commit to good faith engagement
|
||||
- Refusal may trigger individual outreach
|
||||
- Alternative options available if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Selecting a Facilitator
|
||||
|
||||
**The Facilitator Pool**
|
||||
Community maintains trained volunteers:
|
||||
- Completed facilitation training
|
||||
- Understand community values
|
||||
- Diverse backgrounds and perspectives
|
||||
- Committed to neutrality
|
||||
- Bot maintains current roster
|
||||
|
||||
**Joint Selection Process**
|
||||
Parties work together to select facilitator:
|
||||
1. Committee provides list of available facilitators
|
||||
2. Parties review facilitator backgrounds
|
||||
3. Parties jointly agree on selection
|
||||
4. If no agreement, committee suggests options
|
||||
5. Ultimately parties must both accept facilitator
|
||||
|
||||
**Facilitator Role**
|
||||
The facilitator:
|
||||
- Helps guide the conversation
|
||||
- Ensures all voices are heard
|
||||
- Maintains focus on resolution
|
||||
- Remains neutral throughout
|
||||
- Supports productive dialogue
|
||||
- Does not impose solutions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Meeting Logistics
|
||||
|
||||
**Neutral Spaces**
|
||||
Meetings occur in:
|
||||
- Community spaces accessible to all
|
||||
- Neutral locations (not either party's space)
|
||||
- Private settings ensuring confidentiality
|
||||
- Comfortable environments for difficult conversations
|
||||
- Virtual options available if needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Meeting Schedule**
|
||||
Typical timeline:
|
||||
- First meeting within 1-2 weeks of facilitator selection
|
||||
- 90-120 minute sessions
|
||||
- Typically 1-3 sessions
|
||||
- Spaced weekly to allow reflection
|
||||
- Flexible based on participant needs
|
||||
|
||||
**Support Persons**
|
||||
- Support persons may attend with permission
|
||||
- Must be agreed to by all parties
|
||||
- Observe only, do not participate
|
||||
- Provide emotional support
|
||||
- Maintain confidentiality
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Ground Rules and Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Established Practices**
|
||||
All participants agree to:
|
||||
- One speaker at a time
|
||||
- Focus on issues, not personal attacks
|
||||
- Use respectful language
|
||||
- Practice active listening
|
||||
- Take breaks as needed
|
||||
- Maintain confidentiality
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Flow**
|
||||
Typical session structure:
|
||||
1. Facilitator opens and reviews ground rules
|
||||
2. Each party shares their perspective
|
||||
3. Facilitator helps clarify and reframe
|
||||
4. Identify points of agreement and disagreement
|
||||
5. Explore possible resolutions
|
||||
6. Build toward agreements
|
||||
7. Document outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Dispute Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Developing Shared Understanding**
|
||||
Facilitator helps parties:
|
||||
- Share perspectives without interruption
|
||||
- Identify areas of agreement and disagreement
|
||||
- Clarify facts versus interpretations
|
||||
- Understand each other's concerns
|
||||
- Define what resolution looks like
|
||||
- Identify obstacles to resolution
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope and Jurisdiction**
|
||||
This process handles:
|
||||
- Interpersonal conflicts
|
||||
- Communication breakdowns
|
||||
- Disagreements about behavior
|
||||
- Community standard violations
|
||||
- Relationship repair
|
||||
|
||||
**Escalation Determination**
|
||||
Facilitators recommend escalation for:
|
||||
- Serious safety concerns
|
||||
- Legal violations requiring reporting
|
||||
- Complex issues beyond scope
|
||||
- Situations requiring specialized expertise
|
||||
- Power imbalances preventing fair process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Deliberation and Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
**Building Understanding**
|
||||
Through facilitated discussions:
|
||||
- Each person's needs and concerns heard
|
||||
- Underlying interests explored
|
||||
- Creative options generated
|
||||
- Impacts and consequences considered
|
||||
- Common ground identified
|
||||
|
||||
**Working Toward Resolution**
|
||||
Facilitator supports parties to:
|
||||
- Generate multiple options
|
||||
- Evaluate feasibility of solutions
|
||||
- Build on areas of agreement
|
||||
- Address remaining concerns
|
||||
- Find mutually acceptable outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision-Making**
|
||||
Resolutions require participant consensus:
|
||||
- Both parties must agree
|
||||
- Facilitator cannot impose outcomes
|
||||
- Partial agreements acceptable
|
||||
- Revisiting and revising allowed
|
||||
- May need multiple sessions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Resolution Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Outcomes**
|
||||
Common resolutions include:
|
||||
- Mutual understanding of perspectives
|
||||
- Agreements about future behavior
|
||||
- Commitments to specific actions
|
||||
- Changes to procedures or policies
|
||||
- Plans for relationship-building
|
||||
- Agreed boundaries or separation
|
||||
|
||||
**Documenting Agreements**
|
||||
- Facilitator documents agreed outcomes
|
||||
- All parties review and approve
|
||||
- Submitted to @govbot for records
|
||||
- Include follow-up mechanisms
|
||||
- Specify accountability measures
|
||||
|
||||
**Implementation Support**
|
||||
- Committee tracks agreement implementation
|
||||
- Follow-up check-ins scheduled
|
||||
- Resources provided as needed
|
||||
- Modifications allowed if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: Appeals and Follow-Up
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Appeal**
|
||||
Appeal available when:
|
||||
- New information emerges
|
||||
- Circumstances change significantly
|
||||
- Implementation fails or is problematic
|
||||
- Process fairness questioned
|
||||
- Agreements prove unworkable
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeal Process**
|
||||
1. Party submits appeal to committee
|
||||
2. Committee reviews grounds for appeal
|
||||
3. New facilitator assigned (not original)
|
||||
4. Fresh review of situation
|
||||
5. New sessions held as needed
|
||||
6. Decision on modification or new resolution
|
||||
|
||||
**Follow-Up Sessions**
|
||||
Available for:
|
||||
- Checking on agreement implementation
|
||||
- Addressing new concerns
|
||||
- Adjusting agreements as needed
|
||||
- Continued relationship building
|
||||
- Either party can request
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: Information and Privacy
|
||||
|
||||
**Need-to-Know Basis**
|
||||
Information sharing:
|
||||
- Full details only to direct parties
|
||||
- Facilitators have access to case documentation
|
||||
- Committee tracks process, not details
|
||||
- Community receives anonymized statistics
|
||||
- Annual reports on trends and patterns
|
||||
|
||||
**Confidentiality Commitment**
|
||||
All participants agree:
|
||||
- Not to share details outside process
|
||||
- To protect each other's privacy
|
||||
- To allow anonymized learning
|
||||
- To respect sensitive information
|
||||
- Exceptions only for safety concerns
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Keeping**
|
||||
Bot maintains:
|
||||
- Case timeline and status
|
||||
- Facilitator assignments
|
||||
- Agreements and outcomes
|
||||
- Follow-up schedules
|
||||
- Anonymized statistics
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When facilitating chosen facilitator process:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Coordinate smoothly** - Handle logistics efficiently
|
||||
2. **Support selection** - Make choosing facilitator easy
|
||||
3. **Provide resources** - Share guidelines and templates
|
||||
4. **Track progress** - Monitor timeline and follow-ups
|
||||
5. **Respect roles** - Facilitator guides, parties decide
|
||||
6. **Ensure privacy** - Protect confidential information
|
||||
7. **Enable learning** - Collect anonymized data for improvement
|
||||
|
||||
This process works well when:
|
||||
- Parties want structured support but maintain control
|
||||
- Mutual facilitator selection builds trust
|
||||
- Trained volunteers available
|
||||
- Community values facilitated dialogue
|
||||
- Clear escalation paths exist
|
||||
390
templates/dispute-resolution/community-jury.md
Normal file
390
templates/dispute-resolution/community-jury.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,390 @@
|
||||
# Community Jury Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A process where randomly selected community members evaluate evidence and resolve disputes through structured deliberation*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community upholds six principles:
|
||||
1. **Procedural fairness** - Transparent, consistent process
|
||||
2. **Collective wisdom** - Random selection accesses diverse perspectives
|
||||
3. **Community ownership** - Members resolve their own disputes
|
||||
4. **Balanced perspective** - Multiple jurors prevent bias
|
||||
5. **Reasoned judgment** - Evidence-based decisions
|
||||
6. **Restorative outcomes** - Focus on repair and community health
|
||||
|
||||
**The Jury Approach**
|
||||
Rather than single decision-makers:
|
||||
- Random selection ensures fairness
|
||||
- Multiple perspectives considered
|
||||
- Community standards applied
|
||||
- Decisions made by peers
|
||||
- Accountability to community
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation**
|
||||
- Comprehensive online handbook with searchable content
|
||||
- Print copies available
|
||||
- Audio recordings for accessibility
|
||||
- Bot maintains current version
|
||||
- Regular updates and clarifications
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: Scope and Jurisdiction
|
||||
|
||||
**What Juries Decide**
|
||||
Community juries have authority over:
|
||||
- Inter-member disputes
|
||||
- Violations of community agreements
|
||||
- Conflicts affecting community function
|
||||
- Policy interpretation and clarification
|
||||
- Appeals from committee decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**Eligibility for Jury Process**
|
||||
Cases must:
|
||||
- Involve community members or community matters
|
||||
- Fall within community jurisdiction
|
||||
- Not require emergency response
|
||||
- Be suitable for peer judgment
|
||||
- Bot validates eligibility
|
||||
|
||||
**When Not Appropriate**
|
||||
Some matters require alternative processes:
|
||||
- Criminal violations (refer to authorities)
|
||||
- Immediate safety threats (emergency response first)
|
||||
- Professional disputes (specialized arbitration)
|
||||
- External party disputes (unless they opt in)
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: Initiating Jury Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Submitting a Case**
|
||||
Request submitted via @govbot including:
|
||||
- Parties involved
|
||||
- Nature of dispute
|
||||
- Relevant evidence
|
||||
- Specific questions for jury
|
||||
- What resolution is sought
|
||||
|
||||
**Initial Review**
|
||||
Dispute coordinator reviews within 3 business days:
|
||||
- Confirms eligibility for jury process
|
||||
- Requests additional information if needed
|
||||
- Estimates timeline
|
||||
- Explains process to all parties
|
||||
- Begins jury selection
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Participation**
|
||||
- Members expected to participate
|
||||
- Voluntary for non-members
|
||||
- Proceedings may continue without respondent
|
||||
- Limited scope if party declines
|
||||
- Noted in decision
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Jury Selection
|
||||
|
||||
**Random Selection (Sortition)**
|
||||
Jurors selected randomly from eligible pool:
|
||||
- All members eligible unless excluded
|
||||
- 5-7 jurors selected per case
|
||||
- Random selection ensures fairness
|
||||
- Bot conducts transparent lottery
|
||||
- Selection recorded for accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**Jury Size**
|
||||
Determined by case complexity:
|
||||
- Routine disputes: 5 jurors
|
||||
- Moderate complexity: 6 jurors
|
||||
- Complex cases: 7 jurors
|
||||
- Constitutional matters: 7 jurors
|
||||
|
||||
**Eligibility Requirements**
|
||||
Members eligible for jury service if:
|
||||
- Active community member (60+ days)
|
||||
- Not party to the dispute
|
||||
- No conflict of interest
|
||||
- Available for full process
|
||||
- Agreed to code of conduct
|
||||
|
||||
**Declining Jury Service**
|
||||
Jurors may decline if:
|
||||
- Conflict of interest exists
|
||||
- Unable to be impartial
|
||||
- Personal relationship with parties
|
||||
- Unavailable for process timeline
|
||||
- Other legitimate reason
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Jury Process Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Timeline**
|
||||
Typical jury process:
|
||||
1. Jury selection (3-5 days)
|
||||
2. Materials distribution (immediate)
|
||||
3. Opening statements (Day 1)
|
||||
4. Evidence presentation (Day 1-2)
|
||||
5. Questions and clarification (Day 2)
|
||||
6. Deliberation (Day 3-4)
|
||||
7. Decision (Day 5)
|
||||
|
||||
**Facilitation**
|
||||
Trained facilitator:
|
||||
- Guides proceedings
|
||||
- Ensures fair process
|
||||
- Manages time and order
|
||||
- Clarifies procedures
|
||||
- Does not influence decision
|
||||
- Bot assists with coordination
|
||||
|
||||
**Ground Rules**
|
||||
All participants agree to:
|
||||
- Time-limited statements
|
||||
- Structured evidence presentation
|
||||
- Questions submitted through facilitator
|
||||
- Respectful engagement
|
||||
- Truthful participation
|
||||
- Confidentiality of deliberations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Information and Evidence
|
||||
|
||||
**Three-Tier Access**
|
||||
Information shared based on role:
|
||||
- **Parties:** Full access to all case documentation
|
||||
- **Jurors:** Redacted materials protecting sensitive information
|
||||
- **Community:** Anonymized summaries of decisions
|
||||
|
||||
**Evidence Presentation**
|
||||
Structured process:
|
||||
- Opening statements by each party (10 minutes)
|
||||
- Presentation of evidence with explanation
|
||||
- Witness testimony if relevant
|
||||
- Documents and records
|
||||
- Community standards reference
|
||||
- Closing statements (5 minutes)
|
||||
|
||||
**Juror Questions**
|
||||
Jurors may ask:
|
||||
- Clarifying questions about evidence
|
||||
- Questions about facts presented
|
||||
- Submitted through facilitator
|
||||
- Asked after presentations complete
|
||||
- Focused on understanding, not arguing
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Dispute Assessment Framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment Questions**
|
||||
Jury evaluates using framework:
|
||||
- What facts are agreed upon by parties?
|
||||
- What are the points of disagreement?
|
||||
- What community standards apply?
|
||||
- How credible is the evidence?
|
||||
- What context is relevant?
|
||||
- What are the impacts on community?
|
||||
- Who bears responsibility and to what degree?
|
||||
|
||||
**Consulting Standards**
|
||||
Jury references:
|
||||
- Community constitution
|
||||
- Code of conduct
|
||||
- Established policies
|
||||
- Past jury precedents
|
||||
- Community values
|
||||
- Bot provides relevant documents
|
||||
|
||||
**Identifying Information Gaps**
|
||||
Jury can:
|
||||
- Request additional evidence
|
||||
- Pose clarifying questions
|
||||
- Ask for witness testimony
|
||||
- Review relevant records
|
||||
- Pause for information gathering
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Deliberation Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Private Deliberation**
|
||||
Jury deliberates privately:
|
||||
- Only jurors present
|
||||
- Facilitator available for procedural questions
|
||||
- No parties or observers
|
||||
- Candid discussion encouraged
|
||||
- Process typically 2-4 hours
|
||||
|
||||
**Deliberation Structure**
|
||||
Structured dialogue:
|
||||
1. Initial impressions (each juror speaks)
|
||||
2. Clarify key questions needing decision
|
||||
3. Review evidence systematically
|
||||
4. Share perspectives and reasoning
|
||||
5. Identify points of agreement and disagreement
|
||||
6. Discuss implications of different outcomes
|
||||
7. Build toward consensus or vote
|
||||
|
||||
**Participants**
|
||||
Only jurors deliberate:
|
||||
- Parties do not participate
|
||||
- Facilitator not present (unless requested for procedure)
|
||||
- Administrator available for documents
|
||||
- Community observers not permitted
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Decision-Making
|
||||
|
||||
**Voting Process**
|
||||
Jury decides by vote:
|
||||
- 2/3 majority required for decisions (4 of 6, 5 of 7)
|
||||
- Up to three rounds of voting
|
||||
- Discussion between rounds
|
||||
- If no 2/3 majority after three rounds, 60% minimum applies
|
||||
- Encourages but doesn't require consensus
|
||||
|
||||
**Written Decision**
|
||||
Jury provides:
|
||||
- Clear verdict or determination
|
||||
- Reasoning and rationale
|
||||
- Application of community standards
|
||||
- Consideration of evidence
|
||||
- Any dissenting opinions
|
||||
- Implementation guidance
|
||||
- Bot records and publishes decision
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Outcomes**
|
||||
Jury may decide:
|
||||
- Finding of fact
|
||||
- Interpretation of policy
|
||||
- Responsibility determination
|
||||
- Remedies or consequences
|
||||
- Behavioral requirements
|
||||
- Restitution or repair
|
||||
- Community actions needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: Resolution Outcomes and Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**When Jury Resolves**
|
||||
Decision is implemented:
|
||||
- Binding on parties
|
||||
- Bot executes authorized actions
|
||||
- Parties notified immediately
|
||||
- Implementation timeline specified
|
||||
- Follow-up scheduled
|
||||
|
||||
**Implementation Tracking**
|
||||
- Coordinator monitors compliance
|
||||
- Reports to community if needed
|
||||
- Support provided for implementation
|
||||
- Modifications if circumstances change
|
||||
|
||||
**Resolution Failure Options**
|
||||
If jury cannot resolve:
|
||||
- Refer to mediation
|
||||
- Escalate to governance body
|
||||
- Refer to legal processes
|
||||
- Recommend policy revision
|
||||
- Provide support for separation
|
||||
- Suggest alternative approaches
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: Appeals Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Grounds for Appeal**
|
||||
Appeals accepted for:
|
||||
- New evidence not available during trial
|
||||
- Procedural errors affecting fairness
|
||||
- Misapplication of community standards
|
||||
- Juror bias or misconduct
|
||||
- Implementation proving impossible
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeal Timeline**
|
||||
- Must file within 14 days of decision
|
||||
- Submit to Appeal Committee via @govbot
|
||||
- Committee determines merit quickly
|
||||
- New jury convened if accepted
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeal Review**
|
||||
Appeal Committee:
|
||||
- 3 experienced members
|
||||
- Review appeal criteria
|
||||
- Decide if grounds sufficient
|
||||
- Can dismiss or accept appeal
|
||||
- Decision within 7 days
|
||||
|
||||
**New Jury for Appeals**
|
||||
If appeal accepted:
|
||||
- Larger jury selected (7-9 members)
|
||||
- Reviews all original materials
|
||||
- Considers new evidence if any
|
||||
- Limited hearing held
|
||||
- Can confirm, modify, or overturn original decision
|
||||
- Appeal decision is final
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12: Participants and Observers
|
||||
|
||||
**Who Participates**
|
||||
Full participants:
|
||||
- **Jurors:** Make decision
|
||||
- **Parties:** Present case and evidence
|
||||
- **Witnesses:** Provide testimony if called
|
||||
- **Facilitator:** Manages process
|
||||
- **Administrator:** Handles logistics
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Observation**
|
||||
Process is transparent:
|
||||
- Community members may observe
|
||||
- Observers cannot participate
|
||||
- Must respect process rules
|
||||
- Leave before deliberation
|
||||
- No disruption permitted
|
||||
|
||||
**Support Persons**
|
||||
Parties may have:
|
||||
- Support person present
|
||||
- For emotional support only
|
||||
- Cannot speak or participate
|
||||
- Must be approved by facilitator
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 13: Information and Records
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Keeping**
|
||||
Bot maintains complete records:
|
||||
- Case submissions and evidence
|
||||
- Jury selection process
|
||||
- Proceedings transcripts
|
||||
- Jury decisions and reasoning
|
||||
- Implementation status
|
||||
- Appeals and outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Public Access**
|
||||
Community can access:
|
||||
- Anonymized decision summaries
|
||||
- Precedents and patterns
|
||||
- Process statistics
|
||||
- Redacted case outcomes
|
||||
- Policy clarifications
|
||||
|
||||
**Confidentiality**
|
||||
Protected information:
|
||||
- Jury deliberations (never shared)
|
||||
- Sensitive personal information
|
||||
- Evidence marked confidential
|
||||
- Juror identities (may be disclosed or anonymous as community decides)
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When facilitating community jury process:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Fair selection** - Conduct transparent, truly random selection
|
||||
2. **Process management** - Track timeline and ensure structure followed
|
||||
3. **Information access** - Provide appropriate materials to each role
|
||||
4. **Decision recording** - Accurately capture and publish decisions
|
||||
5. **Precedent tracking** - Build searchable database of past decisions
|
||||
6. **Implementation support** - Execute authorized actions and monitor compliance
|
||||
7. **Appeals coordination** - Manage appeal review efficiently
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when:
|
||||
- Community trusts random selection
|
||||
- Members willing to serve as jurors
|
||||
- Cases suited to peer judgment
|
||||
- Structured process followed consistently
|
||||
- Decisions create useful precedents
|
||||
- Community supports implementation
|
||||
400
templates/dispute-resolution/community-referee.md
Normal file
400
templates/dispute-resolution/community-referee.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,400 @@
|
||||
# Community Referee Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A streamlined process where a single trained referee facilitates and decides on dispute resolution*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community emphasizes:
|
||||
1. **Efficiency** - Streamlining resolution to minimize time and resources
|
||||
2. **Fairness** - Equal treatment and impartial review
|
||||
3. **Expertise** - Trained referees understand community standards
|
||||
4. **Practicality** - Focus on workable solutions
|
||||
5. **Consistency** - Applying standards uniformly
|
||||
6. **Respect** - Dignity for all parties throughout process
|
||||
|
||||
**The Referee Approach**
|
||||
Single-referee model provides:
|
||||
- Quick response to disputes
|
||||
- Expert application of standards
|
||||
- Efficient use of community resources
|
||||
- Consistency in decision-making
|
||||
- Clear accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation**
|
||||
- Comprehensive digital handbook on community website
|
||||
- Searchable by topic and keyword
|
||||
- Periodic workshops on process
|
||||
- Updates communicated regularly
|
||||
- Bot maintains current materials
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: Scope and Jurisdiction
|
||||
|
||||
**What Referees Handle**
|
||||
Referee process covers:
|
||||
- Community agreement disputes
|
||||
- Resource allocation conflicts
|
||||
- Interpersonal conflicts between members
|
||||
- Minor property disputes
|
||||
- Policy compliance matters
|
||||
- Procedure interpretation questions
|
||||
|
||||
**Appropriate Cases**
|
||||
Best suited for:
|
||||
- Routine disputes with clear standards
|
||||
- Situations needing quick resolution
|
||||
- Disagreements about facts or application
|
||||
- Cases without complex emotional dynamics
|
||||
- Matters where fair decision can be reached efficiently
|
||||
|
||||
**Escalation to Other Processes**
|
||||
Some disputes better handled elsewhere:
|
||||
- Complex emotional conflicts → mediation or circles
|
||||
- Serious harm → restorative/transformative justice
|
||||
- Major policy questions → governance body
|
||||
- Legal violations → authorities as needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: The Referee Pool
|
||||
|
||||
**Referee Qualifications**
|
||||
Referees must have:
|
||||
- Deep knowledge of community standards
|
||||
- Dispute resolution training
|
||||
- Demonstrated fairness and impartiality
|
||||
- Strong analytical skills
|
||||
- Communication abilities
|
||||
- Community trust
|
||||
|
||||
**Referee Training**
|
||||
Training includes:
|
||||
- Community values and constitution
|
||||
- Conflict resolution techniques
|
||||
- Evidence evaluation
|
||||
- Decision-making frameworks
|
||||
- Cultural competency
|
||||
- Managing difficult dynamics
|
||||
- Bot systems and documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Maintaining the Pool**
|
||||
- Community maintains roster of trained referees
|
||||
- Regular refresher training
|
||||
- Performance review and feedback
|
||||
- Addition of new referees as needed
|
||||
- Bot tracks availability and assignments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Initiating the Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Dispute Submission**
|
||||
Party submits request via @govbot including:
|
||||
- Parties involved
|
||||
- Nature of dispute
|
||||
- Relevant facts and timeline
|
||||
- Evidence or documentation
|
||||
- What outcome is sought
|
||||
- Urgency level
|
||||
|
||||
**Initial Review**
|
||||
Within 2 business days:
|
||||
- Coordinator reviews submission
|
||||
- Confirms eligibility for referee process
|
||||
- Determines complexity level
|
||||
- Assigns referee
|
||||
- Notifies all parties
|
||||
|
||||
**Referee Assignment**
|
||||
Target within 5 days:
|
||||
- Referee assigned based on availability and expertise
|
||||
- Parties notified of referee identity
|
||||
- Can object if conflict of interest
|
||||
- New referee assigned if valid objection
|
||||
- Bot tracks assignments and prevents conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Referee Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Intake Phase**
|
||||
Referee conducts initial work:
|
||||
- Interviews with each party separately (30-60 min)
|
||||
- Reviews documentation and evidence
|
||||
- Identifies key issues and questions
|
||||
- Determines if joint session needed
|
||||
- Develops process plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Joint Session (if needed)**
|
||||
When parties meet together:
|
||||
- Referee maintains control of process
|
||||
- Structured speaking protocols
|
||||
- Time limits ensure efficiency
|
||||
- Focus on facts and resolution
|
||||
- Typically 60-90 minutes
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional Information Gathering**
|
||||
Referee may:
|
||||
- Request additional documentation
|
||||
- Interview witnesses
|
||||
- Consult community standards
|
||||
- Review precedents
|
||||
- Seek expert input if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Ground Rules and Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Rules**
|
||||
All participants agree to:
|
||||
- Equal opportunity to present perspectives
|
||||
- No interruption during presentations
|
||||
- Respectful language and tone
|
||||
- Truthful statements
|
||||
- Time limits respected
|
||||
- Referee's process authority
|
||||
|
||||
**Structured Speaking**
|
||||
- Each party presents uninterrupted
|
||||
- Specific time allocated (typically 10-15 min)
|
||||
- Questions asked through referee
|
||||
- Rebuttals brief and focused
|
||||
- Closing statements (5 min)
|
||||
|
||||
**Confidentiality Protocols**
|
||||
- Case information shared only with referee and parties
|
||||
- Witnesses get only relevant information
|
||||
- Decision may be published (anonymized)
|
||||
- Sensitive details protected
|
||||
- Exceptions for safety concerns
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Dispute Assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Referee Analysis**
|
||||
Referee evaluates:
|
||||
- Agreed facts and disputed facts
|
||||
- Applicable community standards
|
||||
- Credibility of evidence
|
||||
- Context and history
|
||||
- Whether new issue or ongoing pattern
|
||||
- Impact on parties and community
|
||||
|
||||
**Standards Application**
|
||||
Referee consults:
|
||||
- Community constitution
|
||||
- Relevant policies
|
||||
- Code of conduct
|
||||
- Past referee decisions (precedents)
|
||||
- Community values
|
||||
- Bot provides searchable access
|
||||
|
||||
**Fact-Finding**
|
||||
Through evidence evaluation:
|
||||
- Review of submissions
|
||||
- Witness statements
|
||||
- Documentary evidence
|
||||
- Community standards
|
||||
- Contextual factors
|
||||
- Precedent review
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Handling Non-Participation
|
||||
|
||||
**When Party Doesn't Engage**
|
||||
Members expected to participate but:
|
||||
- Process may proceed without active participation
|
||||
- Decisions made based on available information
|
||||
- Non-participating party still bound by decision
|
||||
- Noted in decision rationale
|
||||
|
||||
**For Non-Members**
|
||||
- Process is voluntary
|
||||
- Cannot compel participation
|
||||
- Limited decisions possible without full participation
|
||||
- May recommend separation or boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
**Good Faith Requirement**
|
||||
Parties expected to:
|
||||
- Participate honestly
|
||||
- Provide requested information
|
||||
- Respect process
|
||||
- Accept referee authority
|
||||
- Implement decision
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Deliberation and Decision
|
||||
|
||||
**Referee Deliberation**
|
||||
Referee considers:
|
||||
- All evidence and testimony
|
||||
- Applicable standards
|
||||
- Precedents
|
||||
- Practical implications
|
||||
- Community values
|
||||
- Fair and workable outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Structured Discussion**
|
||||
Before final decision:
|
||||
- Referee summarizes points of agreement and disagreement
|
||||
- Identifies key questions
|
||||
- Discusses potential outcomes with parties
|
||||
- Reality-tests proposed solutions
|
||||
- Allows final statements
|
||||
|
||||
**Participants**
|
||||
Throughout process:
|
||||
- **Primary parties** - Present case and participate
|
||||
- **Referee** - Facilitates and decides
|
||||
- **Support persons** - May attend for emotional support
|
||||
- **Witnesses** - Provide information if called
|
||||
- **Coordinator** - Handles administrative logistics
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: The Decision
|
||||
|
||||
**Written Determination**
|
||||
Referee provides written decision within one week including:
|
||||
- Clear finding or determination
|
||||
- Summary of relevant facts
|
||||
- Application of community standards
|
||||
- Reasoning for decision
|
||||
- Specific requirements or remedies
|
||||
- Implementation timeline
|
||||
- Follow-up if needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Decisions**
|
||||
Referee may:
|
||||
- Determine facts
|
||||
- Interpret policy application
|
||||
- Assign responsibility
|
||||
- Order specific actions
|
||||
- Require apologies or acknowledgment
|
||||
- Mandate restitution or repair
|
||||
- Set boundaries or separation
|
||||
- Recommend policy changes
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Communication**
|
||||
- Decision sent to all parties
|
||||
- Submitted to @govbot for records
|
||||
- Anonymized summary published to community
|
||||
- Implementation coordinator notified
|
||||
- Bot tracks and monitors compliance
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: Implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**Carrying Out Decisions**
|
||||
- Bot executes authorized actions where possible
|
||||
- Parties responsible for their requirements
|
||||
- Coordinator monitors compliance
|
||||
- Regular check-ins scheduled
|
||||
- Support provided as needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Compliance Tracking**
|
||||
- Deadlines tracked by bot
|
||||
- Parties report completion
|
||||
- Coordinator verifies
|
||||
- Community notified if non-compliance
|
||||
- May escalate if requirements not met
|
||||
|
||||
**When Implementation Fails**
|
||||
If party doesn't comply:
|
||||
- Coordinator contacts party
|
||||
- Understands barriers
|
||||
- Referee may modify if circumstances changed
|
||||
- Escalate to governance body if willful non-compliance
|
||||
- May result in further consequences
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12: Escalation Options
|
||||
|
||||
**When Referee Process Insufficient**
|
||||
Some cases need escalation:
|
||||
- **Three-referee panel** - For complex cases needing multiple perspectives
|
||||
- **Mediation** - For cases needing facilitated dialogue
|
||||
- **Governance body** - For policy questions or major decisions
|
||||
- **Professional services** - For specialized expertise
|
||||
- **Legal processes** - When outside community jurisdiction
|
||||
|
||||
**Requesting Escalation**
|
||||
Either party or referee can request:
|
||||
- Submit escalation request to coordinator
|
||||
- Explain why current process insufficient
|
||||
- Coordinator determines appropriate path
|
||||
- New process initiated
|
||||
- Original referee decision may be suspended
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 13: Appeals Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Grounds for Appeal**
|
||||
Appeals accepted only for:
|
||||
- Significant new information not previously available
|
||||
- Misapplication of community standards
|
||||
- Procedural errors affecting fairness
|
||||
- Evidence of referee bias
|
||||
- Decision implementation proving impossible
|
||||
|
||||
**Filing an Appeal**
|
||||
Within 14 days of decision:
|
||||
- Submit appeal to Appeals Committee via @govbot
|
||||
- Explain specific grounds
|
||||
- Provide supporting information
|
||||
- Pay fee if applicable (refunded if appeal successful)
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeals Committee**
|
||||
Three-referee panel reviews:
|
||||
- Committee evaluates appeal grounds
|
||||
- Decides if criteria met
|
||||
- Reviews within 10 days
|
||||
- Can request additional information
|
||||
- Determines: dismiss, modify, or overturn
|
||||
|
||||
**Senior Referee Review**
|
||||
If appeals committee accepts:
|
||||
- Senior referee assigned for review
|
||||
- Reviews all materials
|
||||
- May conduct limited hearing
|
||||
- Issues final determination
|
||||
- Decision is binding
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 14: Information and Records
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Keeping**
|
||||
Bot maintains:
|
||||
- All dispute submissions
|
||||
- Evidence and documentation
|
||||
- Referee determinations
|
||||
- Implementation status
|
||||
- Appeals and outcomes
|
||||
- Anonymized statistics
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Access**
|
||||
Members can access:
|
||||
- Anonymized decision summaries
|
||||
- Precedent database
|
||||
- Process statistics
|
||||
- Training materials
|
||||
- FAQ and guidance
|
||||
|
||||
**Privacy Protection**
|
||||
Confidential information:
|
||||
- Party identities (in published decisions)
|
||||
- Sensitive personal details
|
||||
- Private communications
|
||||
- Referee deliberation notes
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When supporting community referee process:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Efficient coordination** - Move process quickly through stages
|
||||
2. **Referee support** - Provide information access and documentation tools
|
||||
3. **Track precedents** - Build searchable database of decisions
|
||||
4. **Monitor implementation** - Automated tracking and reminders
|
||||
5. **Escalation pathways** - Clear routing to appropriate alternatives
|
||||
6. **Maintain consistency** - Flag conflicts with past decisions
|
||||
7. **Statistics and learning** - Track patterns and outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when:
|
||||
- Community values efficiency
|
||||
- Trained referees available and trusted
|
||||
- Cases generally straightforward
|
||||
- Quick resolution important
|
||||
- Standards clearly documented
|
||||
- Community respects referee authority
|
||||
- Appeal paths available for errors
|
||||
452
templates/dispute-resolution/facilitation-council.md
Normal file
452
templates/dispute-resolution/facilitation-council.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,452 @@
|
||||
# Facilitation Council Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A structured process with a trained council of facilitators who manage the dispute resolution process*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community centers on:
|
||||
- **Equity** - Fair treatment and process for all parties
|
||||
- **Transparency** - Clear procedures and documented decisions
|
||||
- **Restorative justice** - Focus on repair rather than punishment
|
||||
- **Collective decision-making** - Multiple facilitators bring diverse perspectives
|
||||
- **Restorative dialogue** - Communication that heals and rebuilds
|
||||
|
||||
**The Council Approach**
|
||||
Panel-based facilitation provides:
|
||||
- Multiple perspectives on each case
|
||||
- Balanced decision-making
|
||||
- Diverse skills and backgrounds
|
||||
- Reduced individual bias
|
||||
- Consistent application of standards
|
||||
|
||||
**Documentation**
|
||||
- Rules and protocols in searchable online database
|
||||
- Version history tracked
|
||||
- Physical copies at community center library
|
||||
- Regular updates communicated
|
||||
- Bot maintains current version
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: The Facilitation Council
|
||||
|
||||
**Council Composition**
|
||||
The council consists of:
|
||||
- 9-15 trained facilitators
|
||||
- Diverse backgrounds and perspectives
|
||||
- Rotating service terms (2 years)
|
||||
- Staggered terms for continuity
|
||||
- Community nominates and approves members
|
||||
|
||||
**Council Member Qualifications**
|
||||
Facilitators must have:
|
||||
- Completed comprehensive training program
|
||||
- Understanding of community values
|
||||
- Conflict resolution skills
|
||||
- Demonstrated impartiality
|
||||
- Active community participation
|
||||
- Good standing in community
|
||||
|
||||
**Training Requirements**
|
||||
Council training includes:
|
||||
- Restorative justice principles
|
||||
- Facilitation techniques
|
||||
- Community constitution and values
|
||||
- Cultural competency
|
||||
- Trauma-informed practices
|
||||
- Evidence evaluation
|
||||
- Decision-making frameworks
|
||||
- Bot system use
|
||||
|
||||
**Council Governance**
|
||||
- Council elects coordinating committee (3 members)
|
||||
- Coordinator handles case assignment
|
||||
- Regular council meetings for learning and consistency
|
||||
- Annual review and improvement
|
||||
- Bot supports coordination
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: Information Access Model
|
||||
|
||||
**Three-Tier System**
|
||||
Information shared based on role:
|
||||
|
||||
**Tier 1 - Full Access:**
|
||||
- Involved parties
|
||||
- Assigned council panel members
|
||||
- Access to all case materials and deliberations
|
||||
|
||||
**Tier 2 - Anonymized Tracking:**
|
||||
- Council administrators
|
||||
- Process tracking without identifying details
|
||||
- Patterns and statistics
|
||||
|
||||
**Tier 3 - Quarterly Reports:**
|
||||
- Broader community
|
||||
- Anonymized summaries
|
||||
- No identifying details
|
||||
- Trends and learnings
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Initiating the Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Formal Intake**
|
||||
Initiated via:
|
||||
- Online form submission to @govbot
|
||||
- Hard copy form at community center
|
||||
- Both include same information fields
|
||||
- Accessible formats available
|
||||
|
||||
**Intake Form Contents**
|
||||
Requesting party provides:
|
||||
- All parties involved
|
||||
- Description of dispute
|
||||
- Timeline of events
|
||||
- Previous resolution attempts
|
||||
- Desired outcomes
|
||||
- Any safety concerns
|
||||
- Evidence or documentation
|
||||
|
||||
**Council Acknowledgment**
|
||||
Within 24 hours:
|
||||
- Council acknowledges receipt
|
||||
- Assigns intake coordinator
|
||||
- Initial assessment begins
|
||||
- Parties notified of next steps
|
||||
|
||||
**Coordinator Contact**
|
||||
Within 48 hours:
|
||||
- Intake coordinator contacts all parties
|
||||
- Explains process in detail
|
||||
- Answers questions
|
||||
- Schedules initial interviews
|
||||
- Provides process timeline
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Panel Assignment
|
||||
|
||||
**Panel Size**
|
||||
For each case, panel of 2-3 council members:
|
||||
- **2 members** - Routine disputes
|
||||
- **3 members** - Complex cases or serious matters
|
||||
- Coordinator determines based on initial assessment
|
||||
|
||||
**Selection Criteria**
|
||||
Panel members selected for:
|
||||
- Availability for full process
|
||||
- Relevant expertise if needed
|
||||
- Diversity of perspectives
|
||||
- No conflicts of interest
|
||||
- Balanced backgrounds
|
||||
|
||||
**Lead Facilitator**
|
||||
One panel member designated as lead:
|
||||
- Primary coordinator of process
|
||||
- Leads sessions and deliberations
|
||||
- Main point of contact
|
||||
- Ensures process integrity
|
||||
- Supported by other panel members
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Process Ground Rules
|
||||
|
||||
**Talking Piece Protocol**
|
||||
Council uses structured communication:
|
||||
- Talking piece indicates who has floor
|
||||
- Passed in intentional order
|
||||
- Speaker cannot be interrupted
|
||||
- Can pass without speaking
|
||||
- Slows conversation for reflection
|
||||
- Ensures all voices heard
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional Ground Rules**
|
||||
All participants commit to:
|
||||
- Structured speaking order
|
||||
- Time limits respected
|
||||
- Direct communication when productive
|
||||
- Listening without planning response
|
||||
- Focus on resolution
|
||||
- Confidentiality of process details
|
||||
- Respect for all parties
|
||||
|
||||
**Facilitator Authority**
|
||||
Panel has authority to:
|
||||
- Enforce ground rules
|
||||
- Manage time and process
|
||||
- Pause for cooling off
|
||||
- Request additional information
|
||||
- Modify process as needed
|
||||
- Make final determination
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Assessment Phase
|
||||
|
||||
**Structured Assessment**
|
||||
Panel conducts thorough review through:
|
||||
- Individual interviews with each party
|
||||
- Written statements from parties
|
||||
- Witness consultation if relevant
|
||||
- Review of documentation
|
||||
- Analysis using formal framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Assessment Framework**
|
||||
Panel examines:
|
||||
- Facts agreed upon and disputed
|
||||
- Applicable community standards
|
||||
- Context and history
|
||||
- Impact on individuals and community
|
||||
- Underlying interests and needs
|
||||
- Power dynamics at play
|
||||
- Potential for resolution
|
||||
|
||||
**Jurisdiction Determination**
|
||||
Checklist-based assessment:
|
||||
- Falls within community authority?
|
||||
- Appropriate for council process?
|
||||
- Safety concerns requiring escalation?
|
||||
- Legal violations needing referral?
|
||||
- Resources adequate for resolution?
|
||||
|
||||
**Referral Criteria**
|
||||
Cases with serious legal violations or safety threats:
|
||||
- Referred to appropriate authorities
|
||||
- Council may run parallel process
|
||||
- Safety prioritized
|
||||
- Community standards still applied
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Handling Non-Participation
|
||||
|
||||
**Participation Requirements**
|
||||
- Required for active community members
|
||||
- Voluntary for non-members
|
||||
- Non-participation has consequences
|
||||
- Process may proceed without party
|
||||
|
||||
**Modified Process**
|
||||
If party refuses participation:
|
||||
- Council proceeds with available information
|
||||
- Decision may be made in absentia
|
||||
- Limited remedies possible
|
||||
- Non-participating party informed
|
||||
- May affect their community standing
|
||||
|
||||
**Encouraging Participation**
|
||||
Panel makes efforts to:
|
||||
- Understand barriers to participation
|
||||
- Address concerns about process
|
||||
- Offer accommodations
|
||||
- Explain importance and consequences
|
||||
- Provide support if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Deliberation Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Information Gathering**
|
||||
Predetermined schedule for:
|
||||
- **Statements** - Each party presents (30-45 min)
|
||||
- **Clarifying questions** - Panel and parties ask questions
|
||||
- **Witness testimony** - If relevant and requested
|
||||
- **Evidence review** - Documents, records, communications
|
||||
- **Standards review** - Applicable policies and precedents
|
||||
|
||||
**Deliberation Format**
|
||||
Multi-stage structure:
|
||||
- Most cases involve 3-5 sessions
|
||||
- Sessions are 2-3 hours each
|
||||
- Spread over 2-4 week period
|
||||
- Allows time for reflection
|
||||
- Parties and panel have breaks between sessions
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional Voices**
|
||||
Process includes:
|
||||
- **Primary parties** - Central to all sessions
|
||||
- **Council panel members** - Guide and decide
|
||||
- **Invited witnesses** - Provide specific information
|
||||
- **Support persons** - Emotional support for parties (with permission)
|
||||
- **Community representatives** - When case affects broader community
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: Resolution Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Tiered Approach**
|
||||
Panel prioritizes in order:
|
||||
|
||||
**First: Facilitated Consensus**
|
||||
- Panel helps parties reach mutual agreement
|
||||
- Most preferred outcome
|
||||
- Parties control their resolution
|
||||
- Panel guides and supports
|
||||
|
||||
**Second: Council Recommendations**
|
||||
- If consensus not reached
|
||||
- Panel proposes resolution
|
||||
- Strong recommendations to parties
|
||||
- Parties encouraged to accept
|
||||
|
||||
**Third: Binding Decisions**
|
||||
- When needed for community protection
|
||||
- Panel makes final determination
|
||||
- Binding on all parties
|
||||
- Used sparingly
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision-Making Within Panel**
|
||||
Panel decisions require:
|
||||
- Discussion until consensus reached
|
||||
- If consensus not possible, majority vote
|
||||
- Dissenting opinions noted
|
||||
- Lead facilitator breaks ties (if 2-person panel)
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: Resolution Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Outcomes**
|
||||
Council may determine:
|
||||
- Findings of fact
|
||||
- Responsibility determinations
|
||||
- Behavioral requirements
|
||||
- Restitution or repair actions
|
||||
- Boundary setting
|
||||
- Relationship agreements
|
||||
- Community service
|
||||
- Policy recommendations
|
||||
- Apologies or acknowledgments
|
||||
|
||||
**Written Decision**
|
||||
Panel provides comprehensive document:
|
||||
- Summary of dispute
|
||||
- Process followed
|
||||
- Evidence considered
|
||||
- Standards applied
|
||||
- Determination and reasoning
|
||||
- Specific requirements
|
||||
- Implementation timeline
|
||||
- Follow-up plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Decision Communication**
|
||||
- Provided to all parties
|
||||
- Submitted to @govbot
|
||||
- Anonymized summary to community
|
||||
- Implementation coordinator notified
|
||||
- Appeals information included
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12: Implementation and Follow-Up
|
||||
|
||||
**Monitoring Compliance**
|
||||
- Implementation coordinator tracks
|
||||
- Regular check-ins with parties
|
||||
- Bot sends automated reminders
|
||||
- Progress reported to panel
|
||||
- Support provided as needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Follow-Up Sessions**
|
||||
Scheduled as needed for:
|
||||
- Checking agreement implementation
|
||||
- Addressing emerging concerns
|
||||
- Supporting relationship repair
|
||||
- Celebrating progress
|
||||
- Modifying agreements if circumstances change
|
||||
|
||||
**Non-Compliance**
|
||||
If requirements not met:
|
||||
- Coordinator reaches out
|
||||
- Understands barriers
|
||||
- Panel reconvenes if needed
|
||||
- May modify requirements
|
||||
- Escalate to governance if willful refusal
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 13: When Resolution Fails
|
||||
|
||||
**Alternative Pathways**
|
||||
Panel may recommend:
|
||||
- **Specialized mediators** - For deep interpersonal conflicts
|
||||
- **Governance escalation** - For policy questions
|
||||
- **Professional services** - Therapy, legal advice, etc.
|
||||
- **Legal resources** - When appropriate
|
||||
- **Separation protocols** - If co-existence not possible
|
||||
- **Interim measures** - To stabilize situation
|
||||
|
||||
**Partial Resolution**
|
||||
Sometimes full resolution not possible:
|
||||
- Panel addresses what can be resolved
|
||||
- Provides clarity on what remains
|
||||
- Suggests next steps
|
||||
- Documents progress made
|
||||
- Maintains safety and boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 14: Appeals Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeal Criteria**
|
||||
Appeals accepted for:
|
||||
- New evidence not previously available
|
||||
- Procedural errors affecting outcome
|
||||
- Agreements proving unworkable
|
||||
- Changed circumstances requiring revision
|
||||
- Evidence of panel bias
|
||||
|
||||
**Filing Requirements**
|
||||
Within 30 days of decision:
|
||||
- Submit appeal to council via @govbot
|
||||
- Explain specific grounds
|
||||
- Provide supporting documentation
|
||||
- Propose alternative outcome
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeal Review**
|
||||
New panel assigned:
|
||||
- Different members than original
|
||||
- Reviews appeal against criteria
|
||||
- Conducts limited-scope hearing if needed
|
||||
- Decides: affirm, modify, overturn, or remand
|
||||
- Decision within 30 days of acceptance
|
||||
|
||||
**Appeal Outcomes**
|
||||
Appeal panel may:
|
||||
- Affirm original decision
|
||||
- Modify specific elements
|
||||
- Overturn and decide differently
|
||||
- Remand for new process
|
||||
- Provide clarification
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 15: Council Learning and Improvement
|
||||
|
||||
**Case Review**
|
||||
Council regularly reviews:
|
||||
- Patterns across cases
|
||||
- Process effectiveness
|
||||
- Consistency in application
|
||||
- Areas for improvement
|
||||
- Training needs
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Reporting**
|
||||
Quarterly reports include:
|
||||
- Number and types of cases
|
||||
- Resolution outcomes
|
||||
- Process timelines
|
||||
- Trends and patterns
|
||||
- Anonymized learnings
|
||||
|
||||
**Continuous Improvement**
|
||||
Council commits to:
|
||||
- Annual process review
|
||||
- Incorporating feedback
|
||||
- Updating training
|
||||
- Refining procedures
|
||||
- Community input on changes
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When supporting facilitation council process:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Coordination hub** - Manage complex logistics of panels, parties, and sessions
|
||||
2. **Information management** - Implement three-tier access appropriately
|
||||
3. **Timeline tracking** - Multi-session processes over weeks
|
||||
4. **Panel support** - Provide facilitators with tools and documentation
|
||||
5. **Implementation monitoring** - Track compliance with decisions
|
||||
6. **Pattern analysis** - Help council learn from cases
|
||||
7. **Community reporting** - Generate quarterly anonymized summaries
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when:
|
||||
- Multiple facilitators bring diverse perspectives
|
||||
- Complex cases need structured but flexible process
|
||||
- Community values both thoroughness and efficiency
|
||||
- Restorative outcomes prioritized
|
||||
- Strong facilitator training in place
|
||||
- Time available for multi-session deliberation
|
||||
213
templates/dispute-resolution/peer-to-peer.md
Normal file
213
templates/dispute-resolution/peer-to-peer.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,213 @@
|
||||
# Peer-to-Peer Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A self-facilitated process where participants work together directly to resolve disputes*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community emphasizes:
|
||||
- Open dialogue and direct communication
|
||||
- Mutual respect between all parties
|
||||
- Collaborative problem-solving
|
||||
- Focus on solutions rather than blame
|
||||
- Voluntary participation with encouragement
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Standards**
|
||||
- Standards maintained in shared digital and physical formats
|
||||
- Reviewed annually by the community
|
||||
- Accessible to all members
|
||||
- Bot maintains current version
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: Initiating Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use**
|
||||
Members should initiate dispute resolution for:
|
||||
- Interpersonal conflicts between members
|
||||
- Disagreements about community practices
|
||||
- Misunderstandings requiring clarification
|
||||
- Relationship repair needs
|
||||
|
||||
**How to Initiate**
|
||||
1. Submit incident report to @govbot
|
||||
2. Document: parties involved, events, evidence, desired outcomes
|
||||
3. Available in electronic or paper format
|
||||
4. Bot notifies all parties and provides process guidance
|
||||
|
||||
**Voluntary Participation**
|
||||
- Participation is voluntary but strongly encouraged as first step
|
||||
- Treated as good faith effort to resolve conflicts
|
||||
- If party declines, coordinator reaches out to understand concerns
|
||||
- Alternative paths available if unsuitable
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: The Peer-to-Peer Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Self-Facilitation**
|
||||
Participants manage the process themselves:
|
||||
- No third-party facilitator required
|
||||
- Bot provides guidance on communication techniques
|
||||
- Participants choose meeting location
|
||||
- Scheduling arranged mutually
|
||||
|
||||
**Ground Rules**
|
||||
All participants agree to:
|
||||
- Take turns speaking without interruption
|
||||
- Use "I" statements about personal experience
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions to understand better
|
||||
- Summarize understanding to confirm accuracy
|
||||
- Focus on solutions rather than dwelling on problems
|
||||
- Respect confidentiality of the process
|
||||
|
||||
**Meeting Structure**
|
||||
Typical process (60-90 minutes):
|
||||
1. Each person shares their perspective
|
||||
2. Ask clarifying questions
|
||||
3. Identify common ground and differences
|
||||
4. Joint brainstorming of potential solutions
|
||||
5. Agree on specific actions or outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Assessing the Dispute
|
||||
|
||||
**Joint Assessment**
|
||||
Participants work together to identify:
|
||||
- Specific issues that need addressing
|
||||
- How each person has been impacted
|
||||
- Relevant community values at stake
|
||||
- What resolution would look like
|
||||
- Requirements for moving forward
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope and Jurisdiction**
|
||||
This process is suitable for:
|
||||
- Most interpersonal conflicts between members
|
||||
- Communication breakdowns
|
||||
- Disagreements about behavior or actions
|
||||
- Relationship tensions
|
||||
|
||||
**Escalation Criteria**
|
||||
Must escalate to higher level if dispute involves:
|
||||
- Illegal activity
|
||||
- Safety risks to individuals or community
|
||||
- Harassment or serious code of conduct violations
|
||||
- Power imbalances requiring facilitation support
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Deliberation and Problem-Solving
|
||||
|
||||
**Discussion Process**
|
||||
- Open conversation about the situation
|
||||
- Each person's needs and concerns heard
|
||||
- Clarifying questions encouraged
|
||||
- Joint exploration of options
|
||||
- Creative brainstorming of solutions
|
||||
|
||||
**Adding Support**
|
||||
- Initially involves direct parties only
|
||||
- If deadlocked, may invite one mutually trusted person
|
||||
- Support person helps facilitate, doesn't decide
|
||||
- Keeps process peer-to-peer focused
|
||||
|
||||
**Reaching Conclusion**
|
||||
Process concludes when:
|
||||
- Participants feel issues thoroughly explored
|
||||
- Ready to make decisions about resolution
|
||||
- Clear about agreements and next steps
|
||||
- Or agree to escalate to facilitated process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Resolution Outcomes
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Resolution**
|
||||
Successful peer-to-peer process may result in:
|
||||
- Clarifications clearing up misunderstandings
|
||||
- Apologies for harm caused
|
||||
- Behavioral agreements for future interactions
|
||||
- Restoration of harm (returning items, making amends)
|
||||
- Agreed boundaries for future relationship
|
||||
- Recognition of different perspectives
|
||||
|
||||
**Documenting Agreements**
|
||||
- Parties can document agreements if desired
|
||||
- Submit to @govbot for record-keeping
|
||||
- Not required but recommended for accountability
|
||||
- Bot sends reminders if follow-up scheduled
|
||||
|
||||
**Mutual Agreement Required**
|
||||
- Both parties must agree to any resolution
|
||||
- No imposed outcomes in peer-to-peer process
|
||||
- Partial agreements acceptable
|
||||
- Can agree to disagree on some points
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: When Resolution Doesn't Work
|
||||
|
||||
**Escalation Path**
|
||||
If peer-to-peer doesn't resolve the issue:
|
||||
1. Acknowledge that escalation is needed
|
||||
2. Refer to trained mediator pool via @govbot
|
||||
3. Mediators trained in more formal processes
|
||||
4. Professional referral connections available if needed
|
||||
|
||||
**No Penalty for Escalation**
|
||||
- Escalation is normal, not a failure
|
||||
- Shows good faith effort was made
|
||||
- Some disputes need more structured support
|
||||
- Community values trying direct resolution first
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Follow-Up and Accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**Checking Agreement**
|
||||
Follow-up available when:
|
||||
- Agreement isn't working as expected
|
||||
- Circumstances have changed significantly
|
||||
- One party requests check-in
|
||||
- Scheduled follow-up time arrives
|
||||
|
||||
**Requesting Follow-Up**
|
||||
1. Either party submits written request to @govbot
|
||||
2. Request focuses on specific agreement issues
|
||||
3. Initiates new conversation
|
||||
4. May adjust agreements as needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Learning and Improvement**
|
||||
- Bot tracks anonymized patterns (not individual details)
|
||||
- Quarterly summaries help community learn
|
||||
- Information limited to involved parties
|
||||
- Success patterns shared to help others
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Information and Privacy
|
||||
|
||||
**Confidentiality**
|
||||
- Details limited to parties directly involved
|
||||
- Not shared publicly without consent
|
||||
- Bot maintains secure records
|
||||
- Anonymized data only for community learning
|
||||
|
||||
**Access to Information**
|
||||
- Parties have access to their own case documentation
|
||||
- Quarterly anonymized summaries shared with community
|
||||
- Statistics help improve process
|
||||
- Individual privacy protected
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Retention**
|
||||
- Bot maintains dispute resolution records
|
||||
- Available to parties for reference
|
||||
- Supports accountability to agreements
|
||||
- Helps track patterns needing community attention
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When facilitating peer-to-peer dispute resolution:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Make process accessible** - Provide clear, simple guidance
|
||||
2. **Support self-facilitation** - Offer communication tips without taking over
|
||||
3. **Respect autonomy** - Let parties control their process
|
||||
4. **Track agreements** - Help with follow-up and accountability
|
||||
5. **Enable escalation** - Make it easy to get more support when needed
|
||||
6. **Protect privacy** - Keep details confidential
|
||||
7. **Learn from patterns** - Use anonymized data to improve community
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when community culture supports direct communication, members feel empowered to handle conflicts, and higher-level support is available when needed.
|
||||
355
templates/dispute-resolution/restorative-justice.md
Normal file
355
templates/dispute-resolution/restorative-justice.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,355 @@
|
||||
# Restorative Justice Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A collaborative process emphasizing healing relationships and addressing harm through community engagement rather than punitive approaches*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community centers on:
|
||||
- Healing over punishment
|
||||
- Accountability to those harmed
|
||||
- Community wholeness
|
||||
- Honest communication
|
||||
- Personal responsibility
|
||||
- Relationship restoration
|
||||
|
||||
**Restorative Approach**
|
||||
Rather than asking "What rule was broken and what punishment is deserved?", we ask:
|
||||
- Who has been harmed?
|
||||
- What do they need?
|
||||
- Whose obligation is it to meet those needs?
|
||||
- How can the community support this process?
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Standards**
|
||||
- Guidelines shared through printed handbooks
|
||||
- Available in online documents
|
||||
- Visual displays in community spaces
|
||||
- New member orientation includes restorative values
|
||||
- Bot maintains current documentation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: Initiating Restorative Circles
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Use Restorative Circles**
|
||||
Appropriate for:
|
||||
- Harm between community members
|
||||
- Trust breakdowns requiring repair
|
||||
- Conflict affecting multiple people
|
||||
- Situations needing community support
|
||||
- Accountability without punishment
|
||||
|
||||
**Submitting a Request**
|
||||
Individuals submit request forms via @govbot including:
|
||||
- Description of the harm
|
||||
- Who was affected
|
||||
- What outcomes are desired
|
||||
- Willingness to participate in circle
|
||||
- Any safety considerations
|
||||
|
||||
**Coordinator Response**
|
||||
Coordinators acknowledge receipt within 24 hours:
|
||||
- Confirm suitability for restorative circle
|
||||
- Begin preparatory meetings
|
||||
- Identify circle keeper
|
||||
- Schedule the circle
|
||||
- Prepare all participants
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: The Circle Keeper
|
||||
|
||||
**Role of Circle Keeper**
|
||||
Trained circle keepers:
|
||||
- Guide discussions using talking pieces
|
||||
- Ensure equitable participation
|
||||
- Hold space for difficult conversations
|
||||
- Maintain focus on healing and accountability
|
||||
- Do not impose solutions
|
||||
- Trust the circle process
|
||||
|
||||
**Circle Keeper Training**
|
||||
Circle keepers complete training in:
|
||||
- Restorative justice principles
|
||||
- Facilitation techniques
|
||||
- Trauma-informed practices
|
||||
- Community values and culture
|
||||
- Managing difficult dynamics
|
||||
- Self-care and boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
**Selection of Circle Keeper**
|
||||
- Community maintains pool of trained keepers
|
||||
- Coordinator matches keeper to situation
|
||||
- Participants can request different keeper
|
||||
- Bot tracks keeper assignments and availability
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Circle Format and Ground Rules
|
||||
|
||||
**Physical Setup**
|
||||
Circles use intentional space:
|
||||
- Circular seating arrangement (equality)
|
||||
- Centerpiece with symbolic objects
|
||||
- Talking piece passed for speaking
|
||||
- Comfortable, private setting
|
||||
- All participants at equal level
|
||||
|
||||
**Ground Rules**
|
||||
Circle participants commit to:
|
||||
- Speak from personal experience ("I" statements)
|
||||
- Listen deeply without interrupting
|
||||
- Respect the talking piece
|
||||
- Maintain confidentiality
|
||||
- Speak with respect and without blame
|
||||
- Honor the process even when difficult
|
||||
- Care for self and others
|
||||
|
||||
**The Talking Piece**
|
||||
- Only person holding piece may speak
|
||||
- Passes around circle sequentially
|
||||
- Can be passed without speaking
|
||||
- Ensures all voices heard equally
|
||||
- Slows conversation for reflection
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Circle Process and Phases
|
||||
|
||||
**Preparation Phase**
|
||||
Before the circle:
|
||||
- Circle keeper meets individually with participants
|
||||
- Explains process and addresses concerns
|
||||
- Determines who should be invited
|
||||
- Prepares guiding questions
|
||||
- Ensures safety and readiness
|
||||
|
||||
**Opening**
|
||||
Circle begins with:
|
||||
- Welcome and gratitude for participation
|
||||
- Explanation of circle process
|
||||
- Review of ground rules and talking piece
|
||||
- Opening ceremony or reading
|
||||
- Initial go-around for introductions
|
||||
|
||||
**Sharing Perspectives**
|
||||
Multiple rounds with talking piece:
|
||||
- Person harmed shares their experience
|
||||
- Impact on their life and wellbeing
|
||||
- What they need to heal
|
||||
- Person who caused harm shares their perspective
|
||||
- Community members share observations
|
||||
|
||||
**Exploring Harm and Needs**
|
||||
Guided rounds exploring:
|
||||
- Full scope of the harm
|
||||
- Ripple effects through community
|
||||
- Root causes or context
|
||||
- What healing looks like
|
||||
- What accountability means here
|
||||
|
||||
**Building Agreement**
|
||||
Working toward consensus on:
|
||||
- Acknowledgment of harm
|
||||
- Specific repair actions
|
||||
- Behavioral commitments
|
||||
- Support needed from community
|
||||
- Timeline and follow-up
|
||||
|
||||
**Closing**
|
||||
Circle concludes with:
|
||||
- Summary of agreements
|
||||
- Appreciation for participants
|
||||
- Closing ceremony or words
|
||||
- Scheduling follow-up if needed
|
||||
- Releasing the circle
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Assessment and Scope
|
||||
|
||||
**Harm Assessment**
|
||||
Circle evaluates:
|
||||
- Participant perspectives on what happened
|
||||
- Individual and collective needs
|
||||
- Community impact and concerns
|
||||
- Capacity for repair
|
||||
- Resources required
|
||||
|
||||
**Suitable Situations**
|
||||
Most interpersonal conflicts including:
|
||||
- Conflicts between members
|
||||
- Code of conduct violations
|
||||
- Harm to community trust or safety
|
||||
- Situations requiring collective response
|
||||
- Relationship breakdowns
|
||||
|
||||
**Adapted or Redirected**
|
||||
For situations involving:
|
||||
- Ongoing safety risks (adapted with protection)
|
||||
- Legal matters (complement to legal process)
|
||||
- Severe power imbalances (additional support)
|
||||
- Participant unwillingness (voluntary process)
|
||||
|
||||
**Voluntary Participation**
|
||||
- Entirely voluntary for all parties
|
||||
- Pressure or coercion undermines process
|
||||
- Alternative paths available
|
||||
- Non-participation doesn't mean no accountability
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Circle Participants
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Participants**
|
||||
Typically includes:
|
||||
- Person(s) who experienced harm
|
||||
- Person(s) who caused harm
|
||||
- Circle keeper(s)
|
||||
- Support people for primary parties
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional Participants**
|
||||
May also include:
|
||||
- Community members affected by harm
|
||||
- Witnesses to incident
|
||||
- Community leaders or elders
|
||||
- People who can support repair
|
||||
- Family or close friends (as support)
|
||||
|
||||
**Determining Participants**
|
||||
Through preparation phase:
|
||||
- Primary parties identify who should attend
|
||||
- Circle keeper assesses appropriateness
|
||||
- Community representatives invited
|
||||
- Right-sized for productive dialogue
|
||||
- Typically 6-15 people
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Resolution and Agreements
|
||||
|
||||
**Consensus-Based Decisions**
|
||||
Agreements require consensus:
|
||||
- Focus on meeting needs of harmed
|
||||
- Person who caused harm's input valued
|
||||
- Community role in support and accountability
|
||||
- Circle keeper ensures agreement feasibility
|
||||
- All participants agree to support plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Agreements**
|
||||
Common outcomes include:
|
||||
- Acknowledgment and naming of harm
|
||||
- Apologies (when genuine)
|
||||
- Specific repair actions (restitution, service)
|
||||
- Behavioral commitments going forward
|
||||
- Relationship-rebuilding plans
|
||||
- Community support commitments
|
||||
- Follow-up circle scheduling
|
||||
|
||||
**Documenting Agreements**
|
||||
- Circle keeper documents consensus
|
||||
- All participants review and sign
|
||||
- Submitted to @govbot for tracking
|
||||
- Follow-up dates specified
|
||||
- Accountability measures included
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Implementation and Follow-Up
|
||||
|
||||
**Supporting Implementation**
|
||||
Community support includes:
|
||||
- Resources needed for repair actions
|
||||
- Mentors or accountability partners
|
||||
- Regular check-ins on progress
|
||||
- Celebrating successful steps
|
||||
- Addressing obstacles that arise
|
||||
|
||||
**Follow-Up Circles**
|
||||
Scheduled follow-up circles:
|
||||
- Review agreement implementation
|
||||
- Address any new concerns
|
||||
- Acknowledge progress and growth
|
||||
- Adjust agreements if needed
|
||||
- Celebrate repair and healing
|
||||
|
||||
**When Agreements Aren't Met**
|
||||
If commitments not fulfilled:
|
||||
- Coordinator contacts involved parties
|
||||
- Understand barriers to completion
|
||||
- Convene circle to address issues
|
||||
- May modify agreements
|
||||
- May refer to alternative processes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: When Circle Process Doesn't Work
|
||||
|
||||
**Alternative Options**
|
||||
If circle is not successful:
|
||||
- May reconvene later with more preparation
|
||||
- Try different circle keeper or format
|
||||
- Add more support for participants
|
||||
- Refer to mediation for direct dialogue
|
||||
- Connect to professional resources
|
||||
- Consider other accountability processes
|
||||
|
||||
**Not a Failure**
|
||||
When circles don't resolve everything:
|
||||
- Partial progress still valuable
|
||||
- Seeds planted for future healing
|
||||
- Community understanding deepened
|
||||
- Not all harm repairs quickly
|
||||
- Process itself can be healing
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: Reconsideration and Appeal
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Reconvene**
|
||||
Process can reopen when:
|
||||
- Agreements aren't fulfilled
|
||||
- New information emerges
|
||||
- Healing remains incomplete
|
||||
- Relationships need more work
|
||||
- Community impact continues
|
||||
|
||||
**Requesting Follow-Up Circle**
|
||||
Any participant may request by:
|
||||
- Contacting coordinator or @govbot
|
||||
- Explaining need for reconvening
|
||||
- Renewed focus on unresolved concerns
|
||||
- Fresh circle with same or new keeper
|
||||
- Community remains committed to healing
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12: Information and Privacy
|
||||
|
||||
**Confidentiality**
|
||||
Circle maintains confidentiality:
|
||||
- Details remain within circle
|
||||
- Participants don't share specifics outside
|
||||
- Exceptions only for safety concerns
|
||||
- Agreements may be shared as needed for implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Learning**
|
||||
While protecting privacy:
|
||||
- Anonymized statistical summaries shared annually
|
||||
- Patterns help improve community
|
||||
- Success stories (with permission) inspire others
|
||||
- Process learnings shared with circle keepers
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Keeping**
|
||||
Bot maintains:
|
||||
- Request and response timeline
|
||||
- Circle keeper assignments
|
||||
- Agreement documentation
|
||||
- Follow-up schedules
|
||||
- Anonymized outcome data
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When supporting restorative justice circles:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Honor the process** - Respect the deliberate, relational nature
|
||||
2. **Support circle keepers** - Provide logistics and documentation support
|
||||
3. **Track commitments** - Help with accountability and follow-up
|
||||
4. **Protect privacy** - Maintain confidentiality of circle content
|
||||
5. **Enable healing** - Focus on repair not punishment
|
||||
6. **Community connection** - Help mobilize community support
|
||||
7. **Long-term view** - Understand healing takes time
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when:
|
||||
- Community values relationships and healing
|
||||
- Time invested in preparation and follow-up
|
||||
- Skilled circle keepers available
|
||||
- Participants willing to be vulnerable
|
||||
- Community willing to support repair
|
||||
- Focus on transformation, not punishment
|
||||
443
templates/dispute-resolution/shalish-mediation.md
Normal file
443
templates/dispute-resolution/shalish-mediation.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,443 @@
|
||||
# Shalish Mediation Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A modernized approach to traditional village-level mediation, developed with cultural sensitivity and practical improvements*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community centers on:
|
||||
- **Community harmony** - Restoring peaceful relationships
|
||||
- **Restorative justice** - Repair over punishment
|
||||
- **Cultural respect** - Honoring traditional wisdom
|
||||
- **Fairness** - Just outcomes for all parties
|
||||
- **Collective wellbeing** - Community health over individual "winning"
|
||||
|
||||
**Traditional Roots, Modern Adaptation**
|
||||
This process:
|
||||
- Draws from Bangladesh's traditional village-level mediation (Shalish)
|
||||
- Adapts practices for contemporary contexts
|
||||
- Honors cultural traditions while addressing historical limitations
|
||||
- Emphasizes consensual rather than imposed solutions
|
||||
- Maintains community-based approach
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Standards**
|
||||
- Handbook documents procedures
|
||||
- Explains cultural traditions and adaptations
|
||||
- Available in local languages as needed
|
||||
- Trained mediators orient new members
|
||||
- Bot maintains accessible documentation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: When to Use Shalish Mediation
|
||||
|
||||
**Appropriate Disputes**
|
||||
Well-suited for:
|
||||
- Interpersonal conflicts between community members
|
||||
- Family or household disagreements
|
||||
- Neighbor disputes
|
||||
- Resource sharing conflicts
|
||||
- Misunderstandings and communication breakdowns
|
||||
- Matters affecting community cohesion
|
||||
|
||||
**Community-Centered Approach**
|
||||
This process emphasizes:
|
||||
- Maintaining community relationships
|
||||
- Collective resources and shared spaces
|
||||
- Cultural values and traditions
|
||||
- Long-term harmony over quick fixes
|
||||
- Face-saving and dignity for all
|
||||
|
||||
**When Alternative Processes Better**
|
||||
Consider other approaches for:
|
||||
- Cases involving serious violence
|
||||
- Power imbalances requiring advocacy
|
||||
- Situations where mediation pressure inappropriate
|
||||
- Legal violations needing formal process
|
||||
- Cases needing specialized expertise
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: The Role of Mediators
|
||||
|
||||
**Mediator Responsibilities**
|
||||
Mediators:
|
||||
- Help parties communicate effectively
|
||||
- Educate about mediation benefits
|
||||
- Facilitate discussion without imposing solutions
|
||||
- Ensure fair process
|
||||
- Document agreements
|
||||
- Follow up on implementation
|
||||
|
||||
**What Mediators Don't Do**
|
||||
Explicitly, mediators:
|
||||
- Do not render judgments or decisions
|
||||
- Do not advocate for either party
|
||||
- Do not enforce agreements
|
||||
- Do not enforce laws
|
||||
- Do not take sides
|
||||
|
||||
**Mediator Selection and Training**
|
||||
- Community identifies potential mediators
|
||||
- Training in mediation techniques and cultural sensitivity
|
||||
- Understanding of traditional and modern practices
|
||||
- Ongoing education and support
|
||||
- Bot tracks trained mediator roster
|
||||
|
||||
**Solo or Co-Mediation**
|
||||
Mediators decide based on case:
|
||||
- Single mediator for straightforward disputes
|
||||
- Co-mediation for complex cases
|
||||
- Diverse pair for balanced perspectives
|
||||
- Cultural considerations in selection
|
||||
- Parties informed of mediator selection
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Initiating Mediation
|
||||
|
||||
**Requesting Mediation**
|
||||
Disputants request through:
|
||||
- Direct contact with known mediator
|
||||
- Request to mediation coordinator via @govbot
|
||||
- Referral from community leader
|
||||
- Mutual agreement to try mediation
|
||||
|
||||
**Mediator Outreach**
|
||||
After request received:
|
||||
- Mediator contacts both parties
|
||||
- Explains mediation process and benefits
|
||||
- Answers questions and addresses concerns
|
||||
- Ensures voluntary participation
|
||||
- Schedules initial meetings
|
||||
|
||||
**Setting Expectations**
|
||||
Mediators educate parties about:
|
||||
- How mediation works
|
||||
- Benefits of collaborative problem-solving
|
||||
- Mediator's neutral role
|
||||
- Voluntary nature of process
|
||||
- Confidentiality
|
||||
- Focus on future solutions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Process Structure
|
||||
|
||||
**Preparation Phase**
|
||||
Before joint session:
|
||||
- Mediator collects initial statements from each party
|
||||
- Meets privately with each party
|
||||
- Understands perspectives and interests
|
||||
- Identifies key issues
|
||||
- Assesses readiness for joint meeting
|
||||
|
||||
**Establishing Logistics**
|
||||
Mediator arranges:
|
||||
- Neutral meeting location
|
||||
- Convenient time for all parties
|
||||
- Appropriate physical setup
|
||||
- Any needed accommodations
|
||||
- Virtual options if appropriate
|
||||
|
||||
**Joint Mediation Session**
|
||||
Typical structure:
|
||||
1. Mediator opening and ground rules (10 min)
|
||||
2. Each party's uninterrupted statement (15-20 min each)
|
||||
3. Mediator clarification and summarizing
|
||||
4. Issue identification and prioritization
|
||||
5. Discussion and option generation
|
||||
6. Agreement building
|
||||
7. Documenting outcome
|
||||
8. Closing and follow-up planning
|
||||
|
||||
**Session Duration**
|
||||
- Typically 2-3 hours for joint session
|
||||
- Breaks as needed
|
||||
- May require multiple sessions
|
||||
- Flexible pacing based on needs
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Ground Rules and Communication Principles
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Communication Agreements**
|
||||
All participants commit to:
|
||||
- **Speak for yourself** - Use "I" statements
|
||||
- **Avoid blame** - Focus on impacts and needs, not accusations
|
||||
- **Don't interrupt** - Let each person finish
|
||||
- **Attack problems, not people** - Separate issue from person
|
||||
- **Listen to understand** - Not just to respond
|
||||
- **Respect confidentiality** - What's shared stays private
|
||||
- **Participate in good faith** - Genuine effort to resolve
|
||||
|
||||
**Mediator Enforcement**
|
||||
Mediator gently enforces rules:
|
||||
- Reminds if ground rules broken
|
||||
- Reframes inflammatory statements
|
||||
- Takes breaks if tensions high
|
||||
- May meet separately if needed
|
||||
- Maintains respectful atmosphere
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Voluntary Participation
|
||||
|
||||
**Truly Voluntary**
|
||||
Process is voluntary:
|
||||
- Either party can decline
|
||||
- Can leave at any time
|
||||
- No consequences for non-participation
|
||||
- Agreements only if both consent
|
||||
- No coercion or pressure
|
||||
|
||||
**Social Expectations**
|
||||
While technically voluntary:
|
||||
- Community culture may create social pressure
|
||||
- Expectation to attempt resolution
|
||||
- Face-saving considerations
|
||||
- Mediator acknowledges these dynamics
|
||||
- Works to ensure genuine choice
|
||||
|
||||
**When Someone Declines**
|
||||
If party refuses mediation:
|
||||
- Respect their decision
|
||||
- Explore reasons if willing to share
|
||||
- Alternative pathways available
|
||||
- No formal consequences
|
||||
- May return to mediation later if circumstances change
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Assessment and Understanding
|
||||
|
||||
**Seeking Clarity**
|
||||
Mediators help parties:
|
||||
- Share their perspectives fully
|
||||
- Understand each other's views
|
||||
- Identify underlying interests
|
||||
- Clarify facts versus interpretations
|
||||
- Recognize common ground
|
||||
- Define what resolution looks like
|
||||
|
||||
**Developing Consensual Standards**
|
||||
Rather than imposing standards:
|
||||
- Parties discuss what fairness means here
|
||||
- Reference shared community values
|
||||
- Consider cultural traditions
|
||||
- Build mutual understanding
|
||||
- Create their own framework
|
||||
|
||||
**Background Information**
|
||||
Mediator gathers understanding of:
|
||||
- History of relationship
|
||||
- Previous conflicts or agreements
|
||||
- Community context
|
||||
- Cultural considerations
|
||||
- Other factors affecting dispute
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Deliberation Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Information Sharing**
|
||||
Information flows through:
|
||||
- Direct testimony from parties
|
||||
- Witness accounts if relevant and agreed
|
||||
- Documents if provided
|
||||
- Mediator ensures all perspectives heard
|
||||
- Focus on understanding, not proving
|
||||
|
||||
**Additional Voices**
|
||||
May include:
|
||||
- **Primary parties** - Central to process
|
||||
- **Community representatives** - For disputes affecting collective resources
|
||||
- **Family representatives** - In family-related matters
|
||||
- **Elders or respected members** - For cultural guidance
|
||||
- **Witnesses** - If parties agree
|
||||
- All additional participants by mutual agreement
|
||||
|
||||
**Mediator Principles**
|
||||
Throughout deliberation, mediators:
|
||||
- Don't interject their own views when parties agree
|
||||
- "Reality test" disagreements without judgment
|
||||
- Help parties explore consequences of options
|
||||
- Support creative problem-solving
|
||||
- Trust parties to find their own solutions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: Resolution and Agreement
|
||||
|
||||
**Building Consensus**
|
||||
Resolution emerges through:
|
||||
- Negotiation facilitated by mediator
|
||||
- Consensus-building around options
|
||||
- Creative solutions addressing both parties' needs
|
||||
- Voluntary agreement by all
|
||||
- No imposed solutions
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Agreements**
|
||||
May include:
|
||||
- Behavior changes
|
||||
- Communication protocols
|
||||
- Resource sharing arrangements
|
||||
- Apologies or acknowledgments
|
||||
- Restitution or repair
|
||||
- Boundaries or separation
|
||||
- Future conflict prevention
|
||||
|
||||
**Drafting Agreement**
|
||||
Mediator:
|
||||
- Documents agreed points in writing
|
||||
- Uses clear, specific language
|
||||
- Both parties review and approve
|
||||
- All sign the agreement
|
||||
- Each party receives copy
|
||||
- Submit to @govbot for records
|
||||
|
||||
**When Agreement Not Reached**
|
||||
If mediation doesn't result in full agreement:
|
||||
- Partial agreements still valuable
|
||||
- Document any progress made
|
||||
- Identify remaining issues
|
||||
- Discuss next steps
|
||||
- No penalty for non-resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: When Mediation Doesn't Work
|
||||
|
||||
**Reasons Mediation May Fail**
|
||||
- Parties too far apart
|
||||
- Power imbalances too significant
|
||||
- Emotions too raw
|
||||
- Issues too complex
|
||||
- Not right time
|
||||
- Parties not in good faith
|
||||
|
||||
**Alternative Options**
|
||||
Mediator may suggest:
|
||||
- **Break and return later** - Time for reflection
|
||||
- **Additional community input** - Broader consultation
|
||||
- **Different approach** - Try facilitated dialogue or circle process
|
||||
- **Formal referral** - To governance body or external resources
|
||||
- **New mediators** - Different personalities might work better
|
||||
- **Separation protocols** - If co-existence not possible
|
||||
|
||||
**No Failure in Trying**
|
||||
Important to recognize:
|
||||
- Attempting mediation is valuable
|
||||
- Understanding gained even without resolution
|
||||
- Seeds planted for future resolution
|
||||
- Shows good faith effort
|
||||
- Community appreciates the try
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12: Implementation and Follow-Up
|
||||
|
||||
**Agreement Implementation**
|
||||
Parties responsible for:
|
||||
- Following through on commitments
|
||||
- Timeline agreed in mediation
|
||||
- Self-monitoring and accountability
|
||||
- Reaching out if issues arise
|
||||
|
||||
**Mediator Follow-Up**
|
||||
After agreement:
|
||||
- Check-in scheduled (typically 30 days)
|
||||
- Parties report on implementation
|
||||
- Address any difficulties
|
||||
- Celebrate successes
|
||||
- Modify if needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Support**
|
||||
If appropriate:
|
||||
- Community supports implementation
|
||||
- Resources provided as needed
|
||||
- Informal monitoring by respected members
|
||||
- Encouragement and acknowledgment
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 13: Reconsideration and Follow-Up Mediation
|
||||
|
||||
**When to Reconvene**
|
||||
Follow-up mediation appropriate when:
|
||||
- New information emerges
|
||||
- Circumstances have changed
|
||||
- Agreement proving unworkable
|
||||
- Commitments not being met
|
||||
- New conflicts arise from original issue
|
||||
|
||||
**Requesting Follow-Up**
|
||||
Either party may request:
|
||||
- Contact original mediators
|
||||
- Contact coordinating organization via @govbot
|
||||
- Explain need for follow-up
|
||||
- Reassessment determines if follow-up session needed
|
||||
|
||||
**Fresh Start or Continuation**
|
||||
Follow-up may be:
|
||||
- Continuation with same mediators
|
||||
- Fresh process with new mediators
|
||||
- Modified approach based on learnings
|
||||
- Focus on specific unresolved elements
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 14: Information and Privacy
|
||||
|
||||
**Confidentiality**
|
||||
Strong confidentiality protections:
|
||||
- Case details remain among participants
|
||||
- Mediators don't share specifics
|
||||
- Agreements shared only as needed for implementation
|
||||
- Exceptions only for safety concerns
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Learning**
|
||||
While protecting individuals:
|
||||
- Aggregated statistics support program evaluation
|
||||
- Success rates and types of disputes tracked
|
||||
- Patterns inform mediator training
|
||||
- No identifying information shared
|
||||
- Annual reports on mediation program
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Keeping**
|
||||
Bot maintains:
|
||||
- Mediation requests and responses
|
||||
- Mediator assignments
|
||||
- Agreements (confidential access)
|
||||
- Follow-up schedules
|
||||
- Anonymized outcome data
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 15: Cultural Sensitivity and Adaptation
|
||||
|
||||
**Honoring Tradition**
|
||||
This process honors traditional Shalish by:
|
||||
- Maintaining community-based approach
|
||||
- Valuing relationship preservation
|
||||
- Involving respected community members
|
||||
- Seeking harmonious solutions
|
||||
- Recognizing collective over individual
|
||||
|
||||
**Modern Improvements**
|
||||
Contemporary adaptations include:
|
||||
- Voluntary rather than compulsory
|
||||
- Trained mediators rather than just elders
|
||||
- Gender equity in mediator selection
|
||||
- Protection against power abuse
|
||||
- Focus on consensus not authority
|
||||
- Structured process with ground rules
|
||||
|
||||
**Ongoing Evolution**
|
||||
Process continues to evolve:
|
||||
- Community feedback incorporated
|
||||
- Training updated regularly
|
||||
- Cultural practices respected
|
||||
- Modern best practices integrated
|
||||
- Balance of tradition and innovation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When supporting Shalish mediation process:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Cultural competency** - Understand cultural context and traditions
|
||||
2. **Mediator matching** - Connect parties with appropriate mediators
|
||||
3. **Process flexibility** - Support various formats and pacing
|
||||
4. **Privacy protection** - Strong confidentiality for this voluntary process
|
||||
5. **Follow-up facilitation** - Enable ongoing support and check-ins
|
||||
6. **Community learning** - Track patterns while protecting individuals
|
||||
7. **Resource connection** - Link to alternative processes when needed
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when:
|
||||
- Community values harmony and relationship
|
||||
- Cultural traditions respected
|
||||
- Skilled mediators available and trusted
|
||||
- Voluntary nature genuinely upheld
|
||||
- Focus on consensus over authority
|
||||
- Long-term relationships matter more than being "right"
|
||||
- Community provides supportive context
|
||||
353
templates/dispute-resolution/transformative-justice.md
Normal file
353
templates/dispute-resolution/transformative-justice.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,353 @@
|
||||
# Transformative Justice Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
*A process addressing immediate harm while transforming conditions that enabled it*
|
||||
|
||||
This dispute resolution protocol can be integrated into any governance constitution as an article on conflict resolution.
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Article: Dispute Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1: Principles and Values
|
||||
|
||||
**Core Values**
|
||||
This community operates on seven transformative justice principles:
|
||||
1. **Liberation** - Building a world where all can thrive
|
||||
2. **Accountability without punishment** - Responsibility without state violence
|
||||
3. **Safety and support** - For all involved, especially most impacted
|
||||
4. **Collective action** - Community involvement, not isolation
|
||||
5. **Addressing root causes** - Changing conditions that enabled harm
|
||||
6. **Faith in transformation** - People's capacity to change and heal
|
||||
7. **Sustainability** - Long-term commitment to change
|
||||
|
||||
**Transformative Approach**
|
||||
We address not just individual incidents but:
|
||||
- Patterns of behavior
|
||||
- Power dynamics at play
|
||||
- Structural and systemic factors
|
||||
- Community conditions that enable harm
|
||||
- Long-term cultural change
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Standards**
|
||||
- Documentation in accessible formats
|
||||
- Multiple languages if needed
|
||||
- Regular workshops on values and practices
|
||||
- Living document that evolves
|
||||
- Bot maintains current materials
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2: Initiating the Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Multiple Entry Points**
|
||||
Process can be initiated via:
|
||||
- Secure online form
|
||||
- Phone hotline
|
||||
- Direct conversation with trained member
|
||||
- Through support person or ally
|
||||
- Anonymous reporting option
|
||||
|
||||
**Initial Assessment**
|
||||
Within 48 hours:
|
||||
- Initial safety assessment
|
||||
- Identify immediate needs
|
||||
- Determine process appropriateness
|
||||
- Form facilitation team
|
||||
- Begin gathering support
|
||||
|
||||
**Who Can Initiate**
|
||||
Process can be started by:
|
||||
- Person directly harmed
|
||||
- Witnesses to harm
|
||||
- Community members concerned about patterns
|
||||
- Person who caused harm seeking accountability
|
||||
- Support people acting on behalf of others
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3: Support Teams and Facilitation
|
||||
|
||||
**Facilitation Teams**
|
||||
Teams of 2-3 trained members:
|
||||
- Guide overall process
|
||||
- Coordinate different components
|
||||
- Hold complexity and multiple timelines
|
||||
- Connect to resources
|
||||
- Maintain process integrity
|
||||
|
||||
**Support Teams for All Parties**
|
||||
Each person involved has support team:
|
||||
- Person harmed: support, advocacy, healing resources
|
||||
- Person who caused harm: accountability support, transformation work
|
||||
- Community members: processing impact, staying engaged
|
||||
- Support teams meet separately and coordinate
|
||||
|
||||
**Trauma-Informed Practice**
|
||||
All facilitators trained in:
|
||||
- Recognizing trauma responses
|
||||
- Creating safety
|
||||
- Preventing re-traumatization
|
||||
- Cultural competency
|
||||
- Power analysis
|
||||
- Self-care and sustainability
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4: Communication Norms and Ground Rules
|
||||
|
||||
**Process Agreements**
|
||||
Participants commit to:
|
||||
- Using "I" statements about personal experience
|
||||
- Active listening without interruption
|
||||
- Acknowledging systemic factors alongside individual actions
|
||||
- Respecting different paces of healing
|
||||
- Maintaining confidentiality with specified exceptions
|
||||
- Supporting long-term transformation
|
||||
|
||||
**Safety Protocols**
|
||||
Process includes:
|
||||
- Safety planning with those harmed
|
||||
- Boundaries around contact between parties
|
||||
- Emergency contacts and backup plans
|
||||
- Clear escalation procedures
|
||||
- Regular safety check-ins
|
||||
- Willingness to pause or modify process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5: Assessment and Analysis
|
||||
|
||||
**Multi-Level Analysis**
|
||||
Comprehensive assessment examines:
|
||||
- **Individual harm** - Specific impact on those harmed
|
||||
- **Behavioral patterns** - History and context of actions
|
||||
- **Relationship dynamics** - Power imbalances and history
|
||||
- **Community factors** - Cultural norms enabling harm
|
||||
- **Structural factors** - Systemic oppression and inequality
|
||||
|
||||
**Understanding Root Causes**
|
||||
Exploring questions like:
|
||||
- What conditions made this harm possible?
|
||||
- What systems of oppression are at play?
|
||||
- What community norms need transformation?
|
||||
- What resources or education were missing?
|
||||
- How do we prevent future harm?
|
||||
|
||||
**Scope and Appropriateness**
|
||||
Most appropriate for:
|
||||
- Community-based interventions
|
||||
- Addressing root causes
|
||||
- Pattern behavior requiring transformation
|
||||
- Situations where state intervention would cause more harm
|
||||
- Building community capacity for accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**When State Systems Needed**
|
||||
Acknowledge that sometimes:
|
||||
- Immediate safety requires outside intervention
|
||||
- Survivors choose to involve authorities
|
||||
- Legal processes run parallel to community process
|
||||
- TJ complements rather than replaces
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6: Voluntary Participation
|
||||
|
||||
**Consent-Based Process**
|
||||
Participation is voluntary:
|
||||
- Those harmed decide their involvement level
|
||||
- Person who caused harm encouraged but not forced
|
||||
- Community members choose engagement
|
||||
- Can pause or leave at any time
|
||||
- Different participation levels available
|
||||
|
||||
**When Someone Declines**
|
||||
Process may continue focusing on:
|
||||
- Support for those harmed
|
||||
- Community education and prevention
|
||||
- Systemic changes to prevent future harm
|
||||
- Transformation work with willing participants
|
||||
- Community accountability even without direct participation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7: Deliberation Process
|
||||
|
||||
**Multiple Formats**
|
||||
Process uses various formats:
|
||||
- Large group dialogue sessions
|
||||
- One-on-one conversations
|
||||
- Small group discussions
|
||||
- Writing and reflection
|
||||
- Artistic expression
|
||||
- Action and practice
|
||||
|
||||
**Trauma-Informed Pacing**
|
||||
- Respects different healing timelines
|
||||
- Allows breaks and pauses
|
||||
- No rushing toward resolution
|
||||
- Honors that transformation takes time
|
||||
- Regular check-ins on pacing
|
||||
|
||||
**Participants**
|
||||
May include:
|
||||
- Core participants (harmed, harm-doer)
|
||||
- Support people for all parties
|
||||
- Facilitation team members
|
||||
- Community stakeholders
|
||||
- Witnesses and those impacted
|
||||
- Content experts (when needed)
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8: Solution-Building
|
||||
|
||||
**Structured Brainstorming**
|
||||
Through facilitated process, identify solutions at multiple levels:
|
||||
- **Individual healing** - What does person harmed need?
|
||||
- **Individual accountability** - What work must harm-doer do?
|
||||
- **Relationship repair** - Can/should relationship be rebuilt?
|
||||
- **Community education** - What does community need to learn?
|
||||
- **Systemic change** - What structures need transformation?
|
||||
|
||||
**Addressing Multiple Levels**
|
||||
Effective transformative justice includes:
|
||||
- Immediate safety and support
|
||||
- Personal transformation work
|
||||
- Relationship healing (if possible/desired)
|
||||
- Community education and awareness
|
||||
- Policy and practice changes
|
||||
- Cultural shift in community norms
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9: Decision-Making and Agreements
|
||||
|
||||
**Consensus-Based**
|
||||
Decisions prioritize those most impacted:
|
||||
- Person harmed has most weight
|
||||
- Others consent to support plans
|
||||
- Creative, multi-faceted agreements
|
||||
- Flexible and revisable over time
|
||||
|
||||
**Types of Commitments**
|
||||
Agreements often include:
|
||||
|
||||
*For person who caused harm:*
|
||||
- Education and learning (workshops, reading, mentorship)
|
||||
- Therapy or counseling
|
||||
- Behavioral changes with accountability
|
||||
- Restitution or repair actions
|
||||
- Community service
|
||||
- Regular check-ins with accountability team
|
||||
|
||||
*For community:*
|
||||
- Policy changes
|
||||
- Educational programming
|
||||
- Resource allocation
|
||||
- Cultural norm shifting
|
||||
- Support structures for prevention
|
||||
|
||||
*For those harmed:*
|
||||
- Healing resources and support
|
||||
- Safety measures
|
||||
- Decision-making power over process
|
||||
- Community accountability to their needs
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10: Implementation and Accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**Long-Term Commitment**
|
||||
Transformation requires time:
|
||||
- Process may span months or years
|
||||
- Regular check-ins and adjustments
|
||||
- Sustained community engagement
|
||||
- Resources for long-term support
|
||||
- Celebrating progress while maintaining accountability
|
||||
|
||||
**Accountability Structures**
|
||||
Include:
|
||||
- Regular reporting to accountability team
|
||||
- Observable behavioral changes
|
||||
- Community witness and support
|
||||
- Consequences for non-compliance (decided by those harmed)
|
||||
- Repair of trust over time
|
||||
|
||||
**When Commitments Aren't Met**
|
||||
If person doesn't follow through:
|
||||
- Facilitation team addresses with person
|
||||
- Support team explores barriers
|
||||
- May adjust expectations or timeline
|
||||
- Those harmed decide on consequences
|
||||
- May include separation from community
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11: Extending Timeline and Process Evolution
|
||||
|
||||
**Flexible Timeline**
|
||||
Process adapts as needed:
|
||||
- May extend timeline for transformation work
|
||||
- Can bring in additional expertise
|
||||
- Might adapt focus while maintaining goals
|
||||
- Responds to changing circumstances
|
||||
- Honors that healing isn't linear
|
||||
|
||||
**Specialist Support**
|
||||
May bring in specialists for:
|
||||
- Trauma counseling
|
||||
- Addiction support
|
||||
- Mental health expertise
|
||||
- Cultural or language support
|
||||
- Legal advice
|
||||
- Youth or elder-specific support
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12: Reconsideration and Follow-Up
|
||||
|
||||
**Structured Reassessment**
|
||||
Process revisited when:
|
||||
- Agreements not being implemented
|
||||
- New information emerges about harm
|
||||
- Harm recurs or patterns continue
|
||||
- More support needed
|
||||
- Ready for next phase of work
|
||||
|
||||
**Follow-Up Process**
|
||||
Includes:
|
||||
- Review of original agreements
|
||||
- Assessment of what's working
|
||||
- Identification of implementation gaps
|
||||
- Adjustment of expectations or support
|
||||
- Recognition of growth and change
|
||||
- Planning next phases
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 13: Information Sharing and Privacy
|
||||
|
||||
**Consent-Based Sharing**
|
||||
Information shared based on:
|
||||
- Explicit consent of those involved
|
||||
- Need for safety of community
|
||||
- Supporting accountability
|
||||
- Educational value for community
|
||||
- Always protecting most impacted
|
||||
|
||||
**Community Learning**
|
||||
While protecting individuals:
|
||||
- Pattern-level data shared for prevention
|
||||
- Educational materials developed from learnings
|
||||
- Community workshops on prevention
|
||||
- De-identified case studies (with consent)
|
||||
- Building community capacity
|
||||
|
||||
**Record Keeping**
|
||||
Bot maintains:
|
||||
- Process timeline and phases
|
||||
- Agreements and commitments
|
||||
- Check-in schedules
|
||||
- Accountability tracking
|
||||
- Resources and referrals
|
||||
- Consent documentation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes for Bot
|
||||
|
||||
When supporting transformative justice process:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Hold complexity** - Multiple timelines, participants, and goals
|
||||
2. **Center most impacted** - Prioritize needs of those harmed
|
||||
3. **Track accountability** - Support long-term commitment tracking
|
||||
4. **Respect consent** - All information sharing requires permission
|
||||
5. **Support facilitation** - Coordinate logistics for complex process
|
||||
6. **Connect resources** - Link to community support and expertise
|
||||
7. **Long-term view** - Transformation takes time, support sustained engagement
|
||||
8. **Learn and adapt** - Use patterns to prevent future harm
|
||||
|
||||
This process works best when:
|
||||
- Community committed to root cause transformation
|
||||
- Resources available for long-term support
|
||||
- Skilled facilitation teams in place
|
||||
- Analysis of systems of oppression included
|
||||
- Focus on liberation, not just resolution
|
||||
- Community willing to change itself
|
||||
- State alternatives needed/desired
|
||||
261
templates/do-ocracy.md
Normal file
261
templates/do-ocracy.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,261 @@
|
||||
# Do-ocracy Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes governance based on initiative and action: those who step up to do work have authority over how they do it.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Core Principle
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: The Do-ocracy Principle
|
||||
"If you want to see something happen, make it happen."
|
||||
- Members who take initiative have authority over their work
|
||||
- Contributors decide how to accomplish their projects
|
||||
- Action and contribution create legitimacy
|
||||
- Community trusts those who do the work
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Autonomy and Responsibility
|
||||
Those who do the work:
|
||||
- Have freedom to choose their approach
|
||||
- Are responsible for the outcomes
|
||||
- Should communicate what they're doing
|
||||
- Remain accountable to community values
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Low Barriers to Action
|
||||
This constitution aims to:
|
||||
- Minimize bureaucratic overhead
|
||||
- Encourage experimentation and initiative
|
||||
- Trust members to make good decisions
|
||||
- Let results speak for themselves
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Who Can Do?
|
||||
All community members can take initiative:
|
||||
- New members equally welcome to contribute
|
||||
- No formal permission needed for most actions
|
||||
- Contribution is the primary membership activity
|
||||
- Bot tracks member participation and contributions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Member Rights
|
||||
All members have the right to:
|
||||
- Propose and execute projects
|
||||
- Make decisions within their work
|
||||
- Request resources for their initiatives
|
||||
- Collaborate with other members
|
||||
- Discuss and advocate for approaches
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Joining the Community
|
||||
New members join by:
|
||||
- Expressing interest and introducing themselves
|
||||
- Starting to participate and contribute
|
||||
- Following the code of conduct
|
||||
- Learning community norms through doing
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Taking Initiative
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Starting Something New
|
||||
To launch an initiative:
|
||||
1. Announce what you plan to do
|
||||
2. Explain the goal and approach
|
||||
3. Mention @govbot to log your initiative
|
||||
4. Start working
|
||||
5. Keep community informed of progress
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Authority Through Action
|
||||
When you take initiative:
|
||||
- You have authority over your project
|
||||
- You decide on implementation details
|
||||
- You set your own timeline and milestones
|
||||
- Others can offer input but you make the calls
|
||||
- Bot supports your work with necessary capabilities
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Collaboration Welcome
|
||||
While doers have authority:
|
||||
- Others can offer to help
|
||||
- Collaboration is encouraged
|
||||
- Contributors share decision-making
|
||||
- Lead doer coordinates unless group decides otherwise
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Limits and Boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: When You Need Permission
|
||||
Some actions require community input via lobbying (Article 5):
|
||||
- Spending significant community funds
|
||||
- Making major platform configuration changes
|
||||
- Establishing new official policies
|
||||
- Actions that restrict other members
|
||||
- Changes affecting everyone's experience
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Reversible Actions Preferred
|
||||
Do-ocracy works best when:
|
||||
- Actions can be undone if problematic
|
||||
- Changes can be iterated on
|
||||
- Experiments are low-risk
|
||||
- Bot maintains reversibility logs
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Respect for Others' Work
|
||||
Don't interfere with others' initiatives:
|
||||
- Don't undo someone's work without discussion
|
||||
- Don't take over projects without invitation
|
||||
- Offer to help rather than criticize
|
||||
- If you disagree, do it differently yourself
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Lobbying and Input
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Announcing Intentions
|
||||
Before major initiatives:
|
||||
- Post your plans to the community
|
||||
- Explain what you want to do and why
|
||||
- Mention @govbot to create discussion thread
|
||||
- Give others time to respond (typically 2-3 days)
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Listening to Input
|
||||
During lobbying period:
|
||||
- Community members offer feedback
|
||||
- You consider the input seriously
|
||||
- You may adjust plans based on concerns
|
||||
- You make the final call as the doer
|
||||
- Bot facilitates discussion
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Proceeding Despite Concerns
|
||||
You can proceed even if some disagree:
|
||||
- If you've heard the concerns
|
||||
- If you're willing to be responsible
|
||||
- If you'll reverse if it doesn't work out
|
||||
- But if strong opposition, consider pausing for more discussion
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: When Things Go Wrong
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Reversing Actions
|
||||
If an action causes problems:
|
||||
- Community discusses the issue
|
||||
- Original doer can reverse their action
|
||||
- If unavailable, others can reverse with discussion
|
||||
- Bot tracks reversals and reasons
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Learning from Mistakes
|
||||
Mistakes are learning opportunities:
|
||||
- No punishment for good-faith efforts
|
||||
- Discuss what went wrong
|
||||
- Adjust approach for next time
|
||||
- Community supports experimentation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Addressing Problematic Patterns
|
||||
If a member repeatedly:
|
||||
- Ignores community input
|
||||
- Causes harm through their actions
|
||||
- Acts in bad faith
|
||||
- Violates community values
|
||||
|
||||
Then stronger intervention needed (see Article 7).
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Accountability and Boundaries
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Code of Conduct
|
||||
All actions must align with:
|
||||
- Community code of conduct
|
||||
- Shared values and principles
|
||||
- Legal requirements
|
||||
- Platform terms of service
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Community Intervention
|
||||
The community can stop or reverse actions that:
|
||||
- Violate code of conduct
|
||||
- Harm members or community
|
||||
- Exceed reasonable authority
|
||||
- Demonstrate bad faith
|
||||
|
||||
Process:
|
||||
1. Member raises concern about action
|
||||
2. Community discusses (minimum 2 days)
|
||||
3. If rough consensus to stop/reverse, bot implements
|
||||
4. Original doer can explain and defend their action
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Removing Harmful Members
|
||||
For serious or repeated violations:
|
||||
- Community discusses removal (minimum 5 days)
|
||||
- Member in question can participate in discussion
|
||||
- If rough consensus, member removed
|
||||
- Bot implements removal decision
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Resources and Infrastructure
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: Access to Tools
|
||||
Members should have access to:
|
||||
- Platform capabilities for their initiatives
|
||||
- Bot functionality to support their work
|
||||
- Information and documentation
|
||||
- Collaboration tools
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Resource Allocation
|
||||
For limited resources:
|
||||
- Small amounts: just take what you need
|
||||
- Larger amounts: lobby the community first
|
||||
- Track usage so others know what's available
|
||||
- Bot helps track resource allocation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Infrastructure Changes
|
||||
Platform configuration changes:
|
||||
- Routine maintenance: do-ocracy applies
|
||||
- Major changes: lobby community first
|
||||
- Security updates: act immediately, announce after
|
||||
- Bot logs all infrastructure changes
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Conflict Resolution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Direct Communication
|
||||
For conflicts between doers:
|
||||
- Talk directly first
|
||||
- Explain your perspectives
|
||||
- Try to find mutually acceptable solution
|
||||
- Assume good faith
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Community Mediation
|
||||
If direct discussion doesn't resolve:
|
||||
- Bring to community for input
|
||||
- Each side explains their view
|
||||
- Community helps find middle ground
|
||||
- Bot facilitates mediation process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.3: Rough Consensus
|
||||
For persistent conflicts:
|
||||
- Community gauges rough consensus
|
||||
- Not unanimous but general agreement
|
||||
- Direction with most support prevails
|
||||
- Minority can still do it differently if not disruptive
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 10: Constitutional Matters
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.1: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
When constitutional meaning is unclear:
|
||||
- Member requests interpretation from @govbot
|
||||
- Bot provides interpretation with reasoning
|
||||
- Community discusses if interpretation is contentious
|
||||
- Rough consensus on interpretation guides future cases
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.2: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
To amend this constitution:
|
||||
1. Member proposes amendment
|
||||
2. Community discusses (7 days minimum)
|
||||
3. If rough consensus supports change, amendment adopted
|
||||
4. Bot updates constitution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.3: Core Principles
|
||||
Amendments should preserve:
|
||||
- Low barriers to action
|
||||
- Authority through contribution
|
||||
- Individual initiative and autonomy
|
||||
- Accountability to community
|
||||
- Trust in members
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates action-oriented governance:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Empowerment**: Members can act without permission
|
||||
2. **Efficiency**: Low overhead for getting things done
|
||||
3. **Flexibility**: Doers choose their approach
|
||||
4. **Accountability**: Community can intervene when needed
|
||||
5. **Trust**: Assumes good faith and responsibility
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should support member initiatives, track what's happening, facilitate lobbying when needed, and help the community intervene only when actions become problematic. Err on the side of letting people do rather than blocking action.
|
||||
289
templates/elected-board.md
Normal file
289
templates/elected-board.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,289 @@
|
||||
# Elected Board Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes representative governance where community members elect a board to make policy decisions on behalf of the community.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Governance Structure
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: The Board
|
||||
The Board is the primary decision-making body:
|
||||
- Sets policies and community rules
|
||||
- Makes administrative decisions
|
||||
- Oversees community operations
|
||||
- Interprets this constitution
|
||||
- Acts on behalf of the membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Board Composition
|
||||
The Board consists of:
|
||||
- 5-7 elected members (odd number for tie-breaking)
|
||||
- Representatives serve staggered terms (2 years)
|
||||
- Board elects its own Chair from among members
|
||||
- Rotating elections maintain continuity
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Board Authority
|
||||
The Board has authority to:
|
||||
- Create and modify policies
|
||||
- Allocate community resources
|
||||
- Authorize bot actions and permissions
|
||||
- Make operational decisions
|
||||
- Form committees and working groups
|
||||
- Amend this constitution (with supermajority)
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Member Rights
|
||||
All community members have the right to:
|
||||
- Vote in Board elections
|
||||
- Run for Board positions
|
||||
- Petition the Board
|
||||
- Attend Board meetings (as observers)
|
||||
- Access Board meeting minutes
|
||||
- Appeal Board decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Member Responsibilities
|
||||
Members should:
|
||||
- Participate in elections
|
||||
- Stay informed about Board decisions
|
||||
- Provide input on important matters
|
||||
- Support community governance
|
||||
- Follow Board policies
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Membership Criteria
|
||||
Membership requirements:
|
||||
- Meet platform account requirements
|
||||
- Agree to code of conduct
|
||||
- Active participation for at least 30 days before voting
|
||||
- Bot tracks membership eligibility
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Elections
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Election Schedule
|
||||
Board elections occur:
|
||||
- Annually for rotating seats
|
||||
- 2-3 seats elected each cycle
|
||||
- Elections in same month each year
|
||||
- Special elections for vacancies if needed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Election Timeline
|
||||
Standard election process:
|
||||
1. Nominations open (10 days)
|
||||
2. Candidates post statements
|
||||
3. Member Q&A period (7 days)
|
||||
4. Voting period (7 days)
|
||||
5. Results announced
|
||||
6. New Board members take office
|
||||
|
||||
Bot coordinates entire election process.
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Nominations
|
||||
Nomination process:
|
||||
- Any member can nominate themselves
|
||||
- Nominators post candidate statement
|
||||
- Statement includes background and goals
|
||||
- No endorsements required
|
||||
- Bot tracks all nominations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.4: Voting Method
|
||||
Elections use majority voting:
|
||||
- Members cast votes for candidates
|
||||
- Each member votes for up to [number of open seats]
|
||||
- Candidates with most votes win seats
|
||||
- Ties resolved by runoff vote
|
||||
- Bot conducts secure voting
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Board Operations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Board Meetings
|
||||
The Board meets regularly:
|
||||
- At least once per month
|
||||
- Special meetings as needed
|
||||
- Meetings announced in advance (3 days notice)
|
||||
- Members can observe
|
||||
- Minutes published within 3 days
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Decision-Making
|
||||
Board decisions require:
|
||||
- Simple majority (more than half) for routine decisions
|
||||
- 2/3 supermajority for constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Quorum of at least 60% of Board
|
||||
- Recorded votes on substantive matters
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Meeting Procedures
|
||||
Board meetings follow these procedures:
|
||||
1. Chair calls meeting to order
|
||||
2. Approve previous meeting minutes
|
||||
3. Address agenda items
|
||||
4. Member comments period
|
||||
5. Adjourn and publish minutes
|
||||
|
||||
Bot facilitates virtual meetings and records.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Board Positions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Board Chair
|
||||
The Chair is elected by Board members:
|
||||
- Sets meeting agendas
|
||||
- Facilitates Board discussions
|
||||
- Represents Board to community
|
||||
- Coordinates with bot
|
||||
- Serves 1-year term
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Secretary
|
||||
Board elects a Secretary:
|
||||
- Records meeting minutes
|
||||
- Maintains governance documents
|
||||
- Tracks Board decisions
|
||||
- Ensures transparency
|
||||
- Works with bot for documentation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Committees
|
||||
Board may form committees:
|
||||
- Specialized working groups
|
||||
- Advisory committees
|
||||
- Investigation committees
|
||||
- Committees report to Board
|
||||
- Bot tracks committee work
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Representation and Accountability
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Representing Members
|
||||
Board members should:
|
||||
- Act in community's best interest
|
||||
- Consider diverse member perspectives
|
||||
- Communicate Board decisions clearly
|
||||
- Be responsive to member concerns
|
||||
- Maintain transparency
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Member Input
|
||||
The Board should seek member input on:
|
||||
- Major policy changes
|
||||
- Significant resource allocation
|
||||
- Controversial decisions
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Strategic direction
|
||||
|
||||
Methods:
|
||||
- Town halls
|
||||
- Surveys
|
||||
- Open comment periods
|
||||
- Community discussions
|
||||
- Bot-facilitated consultations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Recall
|
||||
Members can recall Board members:
|
||||
1. Petition signed by 20% of members
|
||||
2. Recall discussion period (7 days)
|
||||
3. Recall vote (requires 2/3 to remove)
|
||||
4. If removed, special election held
|
||||
5. Bot manages recall process
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Policy Implementation
|
||||
Board policies are implemented by:
|
||||
- Board directing bot to execute actions
|
||||
- Committees carrying out Board decisions
|
||||
- Community members volunteering
|
||||
- Appointed administrators
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Moderation
|
||||
Board oversees moderation:
|
||||
- Appoints moderators
|
||||
- Sets moderation policies
|
||||
- Reviews moderation actions
|
||||
- Handles appeals
|
||||
- Bot executes authorized moderation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Platform Management
|
||||
Board manages platform:
|
||||
- Server configuration
|
||||
- Federation policies
|
||||
- Technical infrastructure
|
||||
- Resource allocation
|
||||
- Bot capabilities and permissions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Member Petitions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: Petition Process
|
||||
Members can petition the Board:
|
||||
1. Draft petition with clear request
|
||||
2. Gather member signatures (minimum 5% of members)
|
||||
3. Submit to Board via @govbot
|
||||
4. Board reviews within 14 days
|
||||
5. Board responds with decision and reasoning
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Petition Types
|
||||
Members can petition for:
|
||||
- Policy changes
|
||||
- Board action on specific matters
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Board member recall
|
||||
- Emergency interventions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Binding Petitions
|
||||
Some petitions are binding:
|
||||
- Recall petitions (if thresholds met)
|
||||
- Constitutional referendum (if 30% of members sign)
|
||||
- Emergency override (if 40% of members sign)
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Appeals and Oversight
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Appealing Board Decisions
|
||||
Members can appeal by:
|
||||
1. Submitting appeal to Board
|
||||
2. Explaining grounds for appeal
|
||||
3. Board reconsiders decision
|
||||
4. Board responds within 14 days
|
||||
5. Further appeal via petition process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
Board interprets this constitution:
|
||||
- Members can request interpretations
|
||||
- Board discusses and votes on interpretation
|
||||
- Interpretation published with reasoning
|
||||
- Guides future similar cases
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.3: Transparency Requirements
|
||||
Board must maintain transparency:
|
||||
- Publish meeting minutes
|
||||
- Explain significant decisions
|
||||
- Share vote tallies
|
||||
- Maintain accessible records
|
||||
- Bot archives all governance documents
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 10: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.1: Board Amendment Process
|
||||
Board can amend this constitution:
|
||||
1. Board member proposes amendment
|
||||
2. Board discusses (minimum 2 meetings)
|
||||
3. Requires 2/3 Board supermajority
|
||||
4. Announced to community (7 days before vote)
|
||||
5. Members can petition against (see 10.2)
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.2: Member Referendum
|
||||
Members can force referendum:
|
||||
- If petition signed by 30% of members within 14 days of amendment
|
||||
- Referendum held (requires majority to override Board)
|
||||
- Gives members final say on constitutional changes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.3: Core Principles
|
||||
Amendments should preserve:
|
||||
- Representative governance
|
||||
- Regular elections
|
||||
- Member voting rights
|
||||
- Board accountability
|
||||
- Transparency requirements
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates representative governance:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Democracy**: Members elect representatives
|
||||
2. **Efficiency**: Board can act decisively
|
||||
3. **Accountability**: Elections and recall mechanisms
|
||||
4. **Transparency**: Open meetings and records
|
||||
5. **Member Voice**: Petitions and referendums
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should facilitate elections, track Board composition and decisions, implement Board-authorized actions, manage petitions and appeals, and maintain the governance archive.
|
||||
292
templates/jury.md
Normal file
292
templates/jury.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,292 @@
|
||||
# Jury Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes governance through randomly selected juries that deliberate on and decide community proposals.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Governance Principle
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: Sortition Democracy
|
||||
This community governs through sortition:
|
||||
- Decision-making juries selected randomly from members
|
||||
- Random selection ensures fairness and broad representation
|
||||
- Rotating juries spread governance participation
|
||||
- Counteracts influence of wealth, connections, or charisma
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Jury Authority
|
||||
Juries have authority to:
|
||||
- Decide on proposals within their scope
|
||||
- Make binding decisions for the community
|
||||
- Interpret policies and constitution
|
||||
- Authorize administrative actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: The Legislature
|
||||
The Legislature coordinates governance:
|
||||
- Receives and organizes proposals
|
||||
- Selects juries for proposals
|
||||
- Manages the policy register
|
||||
- Ensures orderly governance process
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Membership and Eligibility
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Member Rights
|
||||
All community members have the right to:
|
||||
- Petition for proposals
|
||||
- Be selected for jury service
|
||||
- Observe jury deliberations
|
||||
- Appeal jury decisions to new jury
|
||||
- Access the policy register
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Jury Eligibility
|
||||
Members are eligible for jury service if:
|
||||
- Active member for at least 60 days
|
||||
- Agreed to code of conduct
|
||||
- Not currently serving on another jury
|
||||
- No conflict of interest on specific proposal
|
||||
- Bot tracks eligibility
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Jury Duty
|
||||
Jury service is a civic responsibility:
|
||||
- Members should accept when selected
|
||||
- Can decline for valid reasons
|
||||
- Serve for duration of assigned proposal
|
||||
- Compensated if community decides
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Proposals and Petitions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Petition Process
|
||||
Any member can petition:
|
||||
1. Draft proposal with clear question
|
||||
2. Gather signatures (minimum 5% of eligible members)
|
||||
3. Submit to Legislature via @govbot
|
||||
4. Legislature validates and processes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Proposal Types
|
||||
Proposals can address:
|
||||
- Policy changes
|
||||
- Resource allocation
|
||||
- Administrative actions
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Platform configuration
|
||||
- Moderation policies
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Proposal Requirements
|
||||
Valid proposals must:
|
||||
- State clear decision question
|
||||
- Provide necessary context
|
||||
- Identify impact and scope
|
||||
- Suggest implementation approach
|
||||
- Include timeframe if relevant
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: The Legislature
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Legislature Composition
|
||||
The Legislature consists of:
|
||||
- 7 members selected by sortition
|
||||
- 6-month rotating terms
|
||||
- 3-4 members rotate out every 3 months
|
||||
- Ensures continuity and fresh perspectives
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Legislature Responsibilities
|
||||
The Legislature:
|
||||
- Receives and reviews petitions
|
||||
- Validates proposal requirements
|
||||
- Determines jury size for each proposal
|
||||
- Conducts sortition for juries
|
||||
- Maintains policy register
|
||||
- Tracks jury decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Legislature Operations
|
||||
Legislature operates via:
|
||||
- Regular meetings (at least biweekly)
|
||||
- Simple majority for routine decisions
|
||||
- All meetings open to observation
|
||||
- Minutes published
|
||||
- Bot facilitates operations
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Jury Selection and Composition
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Sortition Process
|
||||
Juries selected randomly:
|
||||
1. Legislature determines jury size (5-11 members)
|
||||
2. Bot identifies eligible members
|
||||
3. Random selection from eligible pool
|
||||
4. Members notified of selection
|
||||
5. Jury confirmed when members accept
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Jury Size
|
||||
Jury size based on proposal scope:
|
||||
- Routine decisions: 5 members
|
||||
- Significant policies: 7 members
|
||||
- Major changes: 9 members
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments: 11 members
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Conflict of Interest
|
||||
Members must decline jury service if:
|
||||
- Direct personal interest in outcome
|
||||
- Close relationship with petitioner
|
||||
- Unable to be impartial
|
||||
- Bot tracks recusals
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Jury Deliberation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Deliberation Process
|
||||
Juries decide through deliberation:
|
||||
1. Review proposal and context
|
||||
2. Hear from petitioners
|
||||
3. Discuss among jury members
|
||||
4. Seek additional information if needed
|
||||
5. Deliberate toward decision
|
||||
6. Reach verdict
|
||||
|
||||
Typical timeline: 10-14 days
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Information Gathering
|
||||
Juries can:
|
||||
- Request presentations from petitioners
|
||||
- Invite expert input
|
||||
- Ask questions of community
|
||||
- Research relevant information
|
||||
- Consult policy register and precedents
|
||||
- Bot assists with information access
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Jury Autonomy
|
||||
During deliberation:
|
||||
- Jury operates independently
|
||||
- Community members can submit input but cannot participate in jury discussion
|
||||
- Jury determines its own process
|
||||
- Jury decides when ready to vote
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Jury Decisions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Decision Making
|
||||
Juries decide by majority vote:
|
||||
- Each juror has equal vote
|
||||
- Majority needed for proposal to pass
|
||||
- Ties result in proposal failing
|
||||
- Votes can be anonymous or public (jury decides)
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Written Opinions
|
||||
Jury publishes decision with:
|
||||
- Verdict (approve/reject)
|
||||
- Reasoning and rationale
|
||||
- Implementation guidance if approved
|
||||
- Any dissenting opinions
|
||||
- Bot publishes and archives decision
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Implementation
|
||||
Approved proposals:
|
||||
- Entered into policy register
|
||||
- Bot implements authorized actions
|
||||
- Legislature tracks implementation
|
||||
- Community notified of changes
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Policy Register
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: The Register
|
||||
The policy register contains:
|
||||
- All approved proposals and policies
|
||||
- Jury decisions and reasoning
|
||||
- Implementation status
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Governance precedents
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Register Maintenance
|
||||
Legislature maintains register:
|
||||
- Organizes by topic and date
|
||||
- Keeps register current
|
||||
- Archives superseded policies
|
||||
- Ensures public accessibility
|
||||
- Bot provides register database
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Register as Precedent
|
||||
Jury decisions serve as precedent:
|
||||
- Future juries consult past decisions
|
||||
- Precedent provides consistency
|
||||
- Juries can distinguish or overturn precedent
|
||||
- Constitutional interpretations especially weighty
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Appeals and Reconsideration
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Appeal Process
|
||||
Decisions can be appealed:
|
||||
1. Member petitions for reconsideration
|
||||
2. Must show new information or error
|
||||
3. Requires petition signatures (10% of members)
|
||||
4. New jury selected to hear appeal
|
||||
5. Original jury decision stands unless overturned
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Constitutional Challenges
|
||||
Decisions can be challenged as unconstitutional:
|
||||
- Special constitutional jury selected (11 members)
|
||||
- Reviews decision against constitution
|
||||
- Can overturn if unconstitutional
|
||||
- Constitutional precedent established
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.3: Emergency Review
|
||||
For urgent issues:
|
||||
- Emergency jury convened (5 members)
|
||||
- Expedited process (3 days)
|
||||
- Can temporarily halt implementation
|
||||
- Full jury review follows
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 10: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.1: Implementing Decisions
|
||||
Jury-approved actions implemented by:
|
||||
- Bot executing authorized actions
|
||||
- Designated community members
|
||||
- Legislature coordinating
|
||||
- All actions logged
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.2: Moderation
|
||||
Moderation handled by:
|
||||
- Moderation jury for policy
|
||||
- Moderators executing policy
|
||||
- Appeals to randomly selected jury
|
||||
- Bot supports moderation actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.3: Platform Management
|
||||
Platform changes require:
|
||||
- Proposal and jury approval
|
||||
- Technical committee implementation
|
||||
- Legislature oversight
|
||||
- Bot logs all changes
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 11: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.1: Amendment Process
|
||||
To amend this constitution:
|
||||
1. Petition with 10% member signatures
|
||||
2. Legislature selects 11-member constitutional jury
|
||||
3. Extended deliberation (21 days minimum)
|
||||
4. Requires 2/3 jury supermajority (8 of 11)
|
||||
5. Bot updates constitution if approved
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.2: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
For interpretation questions:
|
||||
- Constitutional jury selected
|
||||
- Reviews question and precedents
|
||||
- Issues interpretation
|
||||
- Binding on future juries
|
||||
- Can be overturned by constitutional amendment
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.3: Core Principles
|
||||
Amendments should preserve:
|
||||
- Random jury selection
|
||||
- Fair representation
|
||||
- Petition rights
|
||||
- Policy register
|
||||
- Appeal mechanisms
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates sortition-based governance:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Random Selection**: Fair representation through lottery
|
||||
2. **Rotating Participation**: Many members serve over time
|
||||
3. **Informed Decisions**: Juries deliberate thoroughly
|
||||
4. **Precedent**: Policy register provides consistency
|
||||
5. **Accountability**: Appeals and constitutional review
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should conduct sortition fairly, support jury operations, maintain the policy register, implement approved decisions, and ensure transparency throughout the process.
|
||||
342
templates/petition.md
Normal file
342
templates/petition.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,342 @@
|
||||
# Petition Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes direct democracy through member petitions and community-wide voting.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Governance Principle
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: Direct Democracy
|
||||
This community governs through direct participation:
|
||||
- Any member can petition for changes
|
||||
- All members vote on petitions
|
||||
- Decisions made collectively by membership
|
||||
- No intermediary representatives
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Petition Authority
|
||||
Successful petitions have authority to:
|
||||
- Create or change policies
|
||||
- Authorize administrative actions
|
||||
- Modify community rules
|
||||
- Allocate resources
|
||||
- Amend this constitution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Participation
|
||||
Governance is accessible to all:
|
||||
- Low barriers to creating petitions
|
||||
- Simple, transparent voting
|
||||
- Clear outcomes and implementation
|
||||
- Bot facilitates the entire process
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Member Rights
|
||||
All community members have equal rights to:
|
||||
- Create petitions
|
||||
- Vote on all petitions
|
||||
- Discuss petitions publicly
|
||||
- Access petition history and outcomes
|
||||
- Challenge petition implementation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Membership Requirements
|
||||
To participate in governance:
|
||||
- Be an active community member
|
||||
- Agree to code of conduct
|
||||
- Voting eligibility after 30 days
|
||||
- Bot tracks membership status
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Member Responsibilities
|
||||
Members should:
|
||||
- Review petitions when feasible
|
||||
- Vote on matters they care about
|
||||
- Participate in good faith
|
||||
- Respect petition outcomes
|
||||
- Help implement approved changes
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Creating Petitions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Petition Process
|
||||
Any member can create a petition:
|
||||
1. Draft clear proposal text
|
||||
2. Submit to @govbot with "petition" tag
|
||||
3. Include rationale and context
|
||||
4. Specify implementation details
|
||||
5. Bot validates and publishes petition
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Petition Requirements
|
||||
Valid petitions must:
|
||||
- State specific change or action
|
||||
- Explain reasoning and impact
|
||||
- Be clear and unambiguous
|
||||
- Identify implementation approach
|
||||
- Follow community values
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Petition Types
|
||||
Petitions can address:
|
||||
|
||||
**Policy Petitions** - Changes to community rules and policies
|
||||
- Voting period: 7 days
|
||||
- Passage threshold: Simple majority (more Yes than No)
|
||||
|
||||
**Administrative Petitions** - Platform configuration and operations
|
||||
- Voting period: 7 days
|
||||
- Passage threshold: Simple majority
|
||||
|
||||
**Resource Petitions** - Budget allocation and spending
|
||||
- Voting period: 7 days
|
||||
- Passage threshold: Simple majority
|
||||
|
||||
**Constitutional Petitions** - Amendments to this constitution
|
||||
- Voting period: 14 days
|
||||
- Passage threshold: 2/3 supermajority
|
||||
|
||||
**Urgent Petitions** - Time-sensitive matters
|
||||
- Must justify urgency
|
||||
- Voting period: 3 days
|
||||
- Passage threshold: Simple majority
|
||||
- Can be challenged as non-urgent
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.4: Petition Clarity
|
||||
Bot reviews petitions for clarity:
|
||||
- Must be understandable to members
|
||||
- Question clearly stated
|
||||
- Implementation feasible
|
||||
- If unclear, bot requests revision
|
||||
- Community can also request clarification
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Petition Discussion
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Discussion Period
|
||||
Before voting opens:
|
||||
- Minimum 2-day discussion period
|
||||
- Petitioner explains and answers questions
|
||||
- Members discuss pros and cons
|
||||
- Bot facilitates discussion thread
|
||||
- Petitioner can revise based on feedback
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Discussion Guidelines
|
||||
During discussion:
|
||||
- Focus on substance, not personalities
|
||||
- Ask clarifying questions
|
||||
- Suggest improvements
|
||||
- Identify concerns
|
||||
- Assume good faith
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Petition Amendments
|
||||
Petitioner can amend during discussion:
|
||||
- Clarify language
|
||||
- Address concerns
|
||||
- Refine implementation
|
||||
- Major changes restart discussion period
|
||||
- Bot tracks amendment history
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Voting
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Voting Period
|
||||
After discussion period:
|
||||
- Bot opens voting
|
||||
- Voting period based on petition type
|
||||
- All eligible members can vote
|
||||
- Votes can be changed before deadline
|
||||
- Bot sends reminders
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Vote Options
|
||||
Members can vote:
|
||||
- **Yes** - Support the petition
|
||||
- **No** - Oppose the petition
|
||||
- **Abstain** - Counted for participation tracking but not in passage threshold
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Passage Thresholds
|
||||
Petitions pass when:
|
||||
- Simple majority: More Yes than No votes
|
||||
- Supermajority: At least 2/3 of votes are Yes (constitutional petitions)
|
||||
- Abstentions don't affect threshold calculation
|
||||
- Bot calculates and announces results
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.4: No Quorum Requirement
|
||||
No minimum participation required:
|
||||
- Petitions can pass with any level of turnout
|
||||
- Assumes members vote on matters important to them
|
||||
- High stakes issues naturally draw more voters
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Petition Results
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Announcing Results
|
||||
When voting closes:
|
||||
- Bot tallies votes
|
||||
- Announces outcome (passed/failed)
|
||||
- Shows vote breakdown
|
||||
- Explains next steps
|
||||
- Archives petition and result
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Implementation Timeline
|
||||
Approved petitions:
|
||||
- Implementation begins within 7 days
|
||||
- Urgent petitions: within 24 hours
|
||||
- Bot executes authorized actions
|
||||
- Implementation progress reported
|
||||
- Completion confirmed
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Failed Petitions
|
||||
If petition fails:
|
||||
- Outcome recorded
|
||||
- Can be resubmitted after 30 days
|
||||
- Resubmission should address concerns raised
|
||||
- Or wait for changed circumstances
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Concurrent Petitions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Multiple Petitions
|
||||
Multiple petitions can run simultaneously:
|
||||
- No limit on active petitions
|
||||
- Bot tracks each independently
|
||||
- Members vote on each separately
|
||||
- Clear labeling prevents confusion
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Conflicting Petitions
|
||||
If petitions conflict:
|
||||
- Both can be voted on
|
||||
- If both pass, later one takes precedence
|
||||
- Or petition can explicitly supersede earlier one
|
||||
- Bot identifies potential conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Related Petitions
|
||||
For related issues:
|
||||
- Consider combining into single petition
|
||||
- Or vote sequentially
|
||||
- Note relationships in petition text
|
||||
- Bot helps coordinate related petitions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: Authorized Actions
|
||||
Bot implements approved petitions:
|
||||
- Policy changes
|
||||
- Moderation actions
|
||||
- Platform configuration
|
||||
- User role changes
|
||||
- Content management
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Action Logging
|
||||
All actions logged with:
|
||||
- Petition that authorized action
|
||||
- Timestamp
|
||||
- Implementation details
|
||||
- Who executed (bot or member)
|
||||
- Reversibility information
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Action Review
|
||||
Members can review actions:
|
||||
- Check audit log anytime
|
||||
- Verify correct implementation
|
||||
- Report discrepancies
|
||||
- Petition for correction if needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Emergency Procedures
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Emergency Petitions
|
||||
For urgent safety/security matters:
|
||||
- Accelerated process (24-hour total)
|
||||
- Must clearly justify emergency
|
||||
- Higher passage threshold (60% Yes)
|
||||
- Can be challenged as non-emergency
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Emergency Actions Without Petition
|
||||
For immediate threats:
|
||||
- Any moderator can act immediately
|
||||
- Must report action within 6 hours
|
||||
- Emergency petition created retroactively
|
||||
- Community votes to ratify or reverse
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.3: Bot Malfunction
|
||||
If bot acts contrary to petitions:
|
||||
- Any member can call emergency halt
|
||||
- Manual override by admin
|
||||
- Emergency petition to address issue
|
||||
- Fix implemented before resuming
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 10: Challenging and Reversing
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.1: Implementation Challenges
|
||||
To challenge implementation:
|
||||
- Member submits challenge to @govbot
|
||||
- Explains discrepancy from petition
|
||||
- Community reviews implementation
|
||||
- Correction made if challenge valid
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.2: Reversing Decisions
|
||||
To reverse approved petition:
|
||||
- Create new petition to reverse
|
||||
- Requires same threshold as original
|
||||
- Constitutional reversals need supermajority
|
||||
- Bot implements reversal if approved
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.3: Constitutional Violations
|
||||
If petition violates constitution:
|
||||
- Any member can raise challenge
|
||||
- Special constitutional review petition
|
||||
- Requires 2/3 vote to overturn
|
||||
- Bot halts implementation pending review
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 11: Petition History and Precedent
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.1: Petition Archive
|
||||
Bot maintains complete archive:
|
||||
- All petitions (passed and failed)
|
||||
- Discussion threads
|
||||
- Vote tallies
|
||||
- Implementation records
|
||||
- Amendments and reversals
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.2: Precedent Value
|
||||
Past petitions inform future ones:
|
||||
- Show community values and priorities
|
||||
- Guide petition drafting
|
||||
- Inform discussion
|
||||
- Establish norms
|
||||
- Not binding but instructive
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.3: Periodic Review
|
||||
Community can review past petitions:
|
||||
- Identify policies needing update
|
||||
- Consider consolidation
|
||||
- Remove obsolete policies
|
||||
- Via normal petition process
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 12: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12.1: Amendment Process
|
||||
To amend this constitution:
|
||||
1. Create constitutional petition
|
||||
2. Extended discussion period (7 days)
|
||||
3. Extended voting period (14 days)
|
||||
4. Requires 2/3 supermajority
|
||||
5. Bot updates constitution if approved
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12.2: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
For interpretation questions:
|
||||
- Member requests interpretation via petition
|
||||
- Community discusses interpretation
|
||||
- Vote on correct interpretation
|
||||
- Guides future similar cases
|
||||
- Bot applies interpretation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12.3: Core Principles
|
||||
Amendments should preserve:
|
||||
- Direct democracy
|
||||
- Member petition rights
|
||||
- Transparent voting
|
||||
- Equal participation
|
||||
- Bot facilitation
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates direct participatory democracy:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Accessibility**: Any member can petition
|
||||
2. **Transparency**: All votes and outcomes public
|
||||
3. **Simplicity**: Straightforward petition and voting
|
||||
4. **Flexibility**: Multiple concurrent petitions
|
||||
5. **Member Power**: Direct decision-making authority
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should make petitioning easy, facilitate clear voting, implement decisions accurately, maintain complete records, and help members track governance activity.
|
||||
350
templates/self-appointed-board.md
Normal file
350
templates/self-appointed-board.md
Normal file
@@ -0,0 +1,350 @@
|
||||
# Self-Appointed Board Constitution
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution establishes governance by a self-selecting board where current board members choose their successors.
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 1: Governance Structure
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.1: The Board
|
||||
The Board is the primary decision-making body:
|
||||
- Sets all policies and community rules
|
||||
- Makes administrative decisions
|
||||
- Manages platform and resources
|
||||
- Interprets this constitution
|
||||
- Selects new board members
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.2: Board Composition
|
||||
The Board consists of:
|
||||
- 5-9 members (odd number)
|
||||
- No fixed term limits
|
||||
- Board determines its own size within range
|
||||
- Board elects Chair from among members
|
||||
- Self-perpetuating membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 1.3: Self-Selection Principle
|
||||
Board members are chosen by the existing Board:
|
||||
- Current members evaluate candidates
|
||||
- Selection based on merit, values, commitment
|
||||
- Ensures continuity and shared vision
|
||||
- Balances stability and fresh perspectives
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 2: Board Authority
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.1: Decision-Making Power
|
||||
The Board has authority to:
|
||||
- Create, modify, and remove policies
|
||||
- Allocate community resources
|
||||
- Make operational decisions
|
||||
- Authorize bot actions
|
||||
- Modify board structure and procedures
|
||||
- Amend this constitution
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.2: Board Independence
|
||||
The Board operates independently:
|
||||
- Not elected by membership
|
||||
- Not subject to recall votes
|
||||
- Self-governing within constitutional bounds
|
||||
- Accountable to community values and mission
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 2.3: Board Responsibilities
|
||||
The Board should:
|
||||
- Act as stewards of community
|
||||
- Consider member interests and feedback
|
||||
- Maintain transparency about decisions
|
||||
- Uphold community values
|
||||
- Plan for long-term sustainability
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 3: Board Membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.1: Selecting New Members
|
||||
When board seat opens:
|
||||
1. Board identifies need (expansion or replacement)
|
||||
2. Board considers candidates
|
||||
3. Candidates may self-nominate or be invited
|
||||
4. Board evaluates fit and qualifications
|
||||
5. Board votes on appointment (majority required)
|
||||
6. New member joins with full voting rights
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.2: Selection Criteria
|
||||
Board considers:
|
||||
- Alignment with community values
|
||||
- Skills and expertise needed
|
||||
- Commitment and availability
|
||||
- Diversity of perspectives
|
||||
- Track record in community
|
||||
- Judgment and temperament
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 3.3: Term and Tenure
|
||||
Board members:
|
||||
- Serve indefinitely once appointed
|
||||
- Can resign at any time
|
||||
- Can be removed by board vote (2/3 majority)
|
||||
- Expected to participate actively
|
||||
- May take leaves of absence if needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 4: Board Operations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.1: Board Meetings
|
||||
The Board meets regularly:
|
||||
- At least monthly
|
||||
- Special meetings as needed
|
||||
- Meetings announced to community (3 days notice)
|
||||
- Open to member observation
|
||||
- Executive sessions for sensitive matters
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.2: Decision-Making
|
||||
Board decisions require:
|
||||
- Simple majority (more than half) for routine matters
|
||||
- 2/3 supermajority for:
|
||||
- Constitutional amendments
|
||||
- Board member removal
|
||||
- Major policy changes
|
||||
- Significant resource allocations
|
||||
- Quorum of 60% of board for valid votes
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 4.3: Board Leadership
|
||||
Board elects officers:
|
||||
- **Chair**: Leads meetings, represents board
|
||||
- **Vice Chair**: Assists chair, covers absences
|
||||
- **Secretary**: Records minutes, maintains documents
|
||||
- Officers serve 1-year terms
|
||||
- Reelection allowed
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 5: Membership and Community
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.1: Member Rights
|
||||
Community members have the right to:
|
||||
- Observe board meetings
|
||||
- Access board minutes and decisions
|
||||
- Provide feedback to board
|
||||
- Petition board for action
|
||||
- Appeal board decisions
|
||||
- Understand governance rationale
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.2: Membership Criteria
|
||||
Community membership:
|
||||
- Approved by board or designated admins
|
||||
- Agree to code of conduct
|
||||
- Participation expectations set by board
|
||||
- Bot tracks membership
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 5.3: Member Participation
|
||||
While not governing directly, members:
|
||||
- Contribute to community life
|
||||
- Follow board policies
|
||||
- Provide input when sought
|
||||
- Can raise concerns to board
|
||||
- Help implement board decisions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 6: Board-Community Relations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.1: Member Input
|
||||
Board should seek input on:
|
||||
- Major policy changes
|
||||
- Resource allocation priorities
|
||||
- Community values and culture
|
||||
- Strategic direction
|
||||
- New initiatives
|
||||
|
||||
Methods:
|
||||
- Town halls
|
||||
- Surveys and polls
|
||||
- Comment periods
|
||||
- Community forums
|
||||
- Bot-facilitated consultations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.2: Transparency
|
||||
Board maintains transparency through:
|
||||
- Published meeting minutes
|
||||
- Decisions explained with reasoning
|
||||
- Advance notice of major changes
|
||||
- Accessible governance archive
|
||||
- Regular board reports
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 6.3: Responsiveness
|
||||
Board should:
|
||||
- Listen to member concerns
|
||||
- Respond to petitions and questions
|
||||
- Explain decisions when requested
|
||||
- Consider member perspectives
|
||||
- Balance various interests
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 7: Petitions and Feedback
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.1: Member Petitions
|
||||
Members can petition the board:
|
||||
1. Submit petition via @govbot
|
||||
2. Gather member signatures (minimum 10% of members)
|
||||
3. Board reviews within 30 days
|
||||
4. Board responds with decision and reasoning
|
||||
5. Bot tracks petitions and responses
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.2: Petition Consideration
|
||||
Board should:
|
||||
- Take petitions seriously
|
||||
- Deliberate on merits
|
||||
- Seek to understand concerns
|
||||
- Make good faith decision
|
||||
- Explain reasoning clearly
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 7.3: Board Discretion
|
||||
Board has discretion to:
|
||||
- Approve petition requests
|
||||
- Modify proposals
|
||||
- Reject with explanation
|
||||
- Seek more information
|
||||
- Implement alternative solutions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 8: Administrative Actions
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.1: Policy Implementation
|
||||
Board policies implemented through:
|
||||
- Bot executing authorized actions
|
||||
- Appointed administrators
|
||||
- Community volunteers
|
||||
- Board members directly
|
||||
- All actions logged
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.2: Moderation
|
||||
Board oversees moderation:
|
||||
- Appoints moderators
|
||||
- Sets moderation policy
|
||||
- Reviews significant actions
|
||||
- Handles appeals
|
||||
- Bot supports moderation
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 8.3: Platform Management
|
||||
Board manages:
|
||||
- Server configuration
|
||||
- Federation policies
|
||||
- Technical infrastructure
|
||||
- Resource allocation
|
||||
- Bot capabilities and permissions
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 9: Board Member Removal
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.1: Voluntary Resignation
|
||||
Members can resign:
|
||||
- Submit resignation to board
|
||||
- Effective immediately or with transition period
|
||||
- Board thanks departing member
|
||||
- Board begins replacement process
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.2: Removal for Cause
|
||||
Board can remove member for:
|
||||
- Serious misconduct
|
||||
- Repeated absence without excuse
|
||||
- Breach of fiduciary duty
|
||||
- Violation of community values
|
||||
- Conflicts of interest
|
||||
|
||||
Process:
|
||||
1. Concerns raised to board
|
||||
2. Member has opportunity to respond
|
||||
3. Board discusses in executive session
|
||||
4. Vote requires 2/3 supermajority
|
||||
5. Decision final
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 9.3: Incapacity
|
||||
If member unable to serve:
|
||||
- Board can declare seat vacant
|
||||
- Requires majority vote
|
||||
- Notice to member if possible
|
||||
- Replacement process begins
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 10: Appeals and Review
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.1: Appealing Board Decisions
|
||||
Members can appeal:
|
||||
1. Submit appeal to board via @govbot
|
||||
2. Explain grounds for reconsideration
|
||||
3. Board reviews appeal
|
||||
4. Board affirms or revises decision
|
||||
5. Response within 30 days
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.2: Constitutional Interpretation
|
||||
Board interprets constitution:
|
||||
- Members can request interpretations
|
||||
- Board discusses and decides
|
||||
- Interpretation published
|
||||
- Guides future decisions
|
||||
- Bot archives interpretations
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 10.3: Board Self-Review
|
||||
Board should periodically:
|
||||
- Review its own performance
|
||||
- Assess decision-making processes
|
||||
- Consider member feedback
|
||||
- Identify improvements
|
||||
- Adjust procedures as needed
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 11: Succession and Continuity
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.1: Maintaining Board Size
|
||||
Board should:
|
||||
- Keep membership near target size
|
||||
- Replace departing members promptly
|
||||
- Balance continuity and renewal
|
||||
- Maintain diverse perspectives
|
||||
- Plan for succession
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.2: Knowledge Transfer
|
||||
When membership changes:
|
||||
- Onboard new members thoroughly
|
||||
- Share institutional knowledge
|
||||
- Explain precedents and context
|
||||
- Provide relevant documents
|
||||
- Bot maintains governance archive
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 11.3: Crisis Succession
|
||||
If board falls below quorum:
|
||||
- Remaining members have emergency powers
|
||||
- Recruit new members immediately
|
||||
- May temporarily lower thresholds
|
||||
- Restore full board size quickly
|
||||
|
||||
## Article 12: Constitutional Amendments
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12.1: Amendment Process
|
||||
Board can amend constitution:
|
||||
1. Board member proposes amendment
|
||||
2. Board discusses (minimum 2 meetings)
|
||||
3. Requires 2/3 supermajority
|
||||
4. Announced to community 7 days before vote
|
||||
5. Members can petition concerns
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12.2: Major Constitutional Changes
|
||||
For fundamental changes:
|
||||
- Extended discussion period
|
||||
- Seek member input explicitly
|
||||
- Consider member petitions
|
||||
- Unanimous board approval preferred
|
||||
- Explain changes thoroughly
|
||||
|
||||
### Section 12.3: Core Principles
|
||||
Amendments should preserve:
|
||||
- Board governance structure
|
||||
- Self-selection process
|
||||
- Member basic rights
|
||||
- Transparency requirements
|
||||
- Appeal mechanisms
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
## Implementation Notes
|
||||
|
||||
This constitution creates board-centric governance:
|
||||
|
||||
1. **Stability**: Self-selection ensures continuity
|
||||
2. **Expertise**: Board chooses qualified members
|
||||
3. **Efficiency**: Clear decision-making authority
|
||||
4. **Stewardship**: Board as community trustees
|
||||
5. **Accountability**: Through transparency and responsiveness
|
||||
|
||||
The bot should support board operations, implement board decisions, facilitate member petitions, maintain governance records, and help the board stay connected with the community.
|
||||
|
||||
This model works well for:
|
||||
- Communities with clear mission and values
|
||||
- Situations requiring consistent vision
|
||||
- When expertise and judgment are crucial
|
||||
- Organizations prioritizing stability
|
||||
- Groups comfortable with trustee model
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user